Template:Non-free historic image is permanently
protected from editing because it is a
heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by
consensus, editors may use {{
edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's
documentation to add usage notes or
categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. This template does not have a testcases subpage. You can create the testcases subpage here. |
I have proposed a wording change to our non-free image templates, and I'm trying to keep the discussion centralized here. Please join in the discussion. ( ESkog)( Talk) 11:31, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
If the copyright on a historic image has expired, then we are free to use any digitized scans of that image, aren't we? Is this template only for historic images that are still covered by copyright? -- Ishi Gustaedr ( talk) 02:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Following the discussion at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 July 24#Image:Malcolmxmartinlutherking.jpg it would seem that the wording on this template at best misleads and at worst is out of step with Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria
The sorts of arguments discussed in that debate were:
I would like the wording of this template to be reviewed and / or instructions to be clear about how it should be used so as to align with Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria -- Matilda talk 22:04, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
I think the problem is that this template was originaly for images that were famious in their own right and that got lost somewhere along the line. Geni 04:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
I would like to remove the words "from press agencies" from the template. It doesn't matter where the image comes from does it? Including those words seems to imply that only images from press agencies are subject to the conditions mentioned. Any objections?
I would also like include the meaning "unique historic image" in the first sentence (ie the image itself is notable rather than the subject, eg The Falling Man) because this template seems to have been used in situations where the image does not meet the definition. Barrylb ( talk) 04:04, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
Must images of historical importance be "subjects of commentary" before we can claim fair use? -- Barrylb ( talk) 07:35, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change this:
This image is a faithful digitisation of a unique historic image, and the copyright for it is most likely held by the person who created the image or the agency employing the person. It is believed that the use of this image may qualify as
fair use under
United States copyright law. Other use of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be
copyright infringement. See
Wikipedia:Fair use for more information. Please remember that the non-free content criteria require that non-free images on Wikipedia must not "[be] used in a manner that is likely to replace the original market role of the original copyrighted media." Use of historic images from press agencies must only be used in a transformative nature, when the image itself is the subject of commentary rather than the event it depicts (which is the original market role, and is not allowed per policy). A rationale must be provided for every article any non-free image is used in, which must also declare compliance with the other parts of the non-free content criteria. Source and other copyright information must also be provided. If this tag does not accurately describe this image, please replace it with an appropriate one. |
to this:
This image is not licensed under the Public Domain. This image is a copyrighted digitisation of a unique historic image, and the copyright for it is
It is believed that the use of this image may qualify as fair use under United States copyright law. Other use of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Non-free content for more information. Please remember that the non-free content criteria require that non-free images on Wikipedia must not "[be] used in a manner that is likely to replace the original market role of the original copyrighted media." Use of historic images from press agencies must only be used in a transformative nature, when the image itself is the subject of commentary rather than the event it depicts (which is the original market role, and is not allowed per policy). A rationale must be provided for every article any non-free image is used in, which must also declare compliance with the other parts of the non-free content criteria. Source and other copyright information must also be provided. If this tag does not accurately describe this image, please replace it with an appropriate one. |
Captaincollect1970 ( talk) 06:19, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
{{
edit protected}}
template.
Anomie
⚔
22:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
As far as I can tell, the change to this template made by SchuminWeb on November 19 was never discussed, and thus there was no consensus for it established. This makes it a Bold edit. I would like to take the next step in WP:BRD and Revert it, but I cannot, since I am not an admin. Therefore I request that an admin revert SchuminWeb's edit of November 19. Thanks. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 23:21, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The template links to a deprecated rationale type, Please consider updating to the wording present in the sandbox Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 17:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please fix bad syntax: "Use of historic images from press agencies must only be used in a transformative nature" should be "Use of historic images from press agencies must only be of a transformative nature" or "... be transformative in nature". (Issues: "Use/used" and "of a ... nature".) — ATinySliver/ ATalkPage 04:54, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please fix "Other use of this image" to "Any other uses of this image"? LucasKannou ( talk) 21:31, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the link in "may qualify as non-free use under..." to "may qualify as fair use under...".
Reason: {{ Non-free logo}}, {{ Non-free character}}, and {{ Non-free computer icon}} all say 'fair use', among a lot of other non-free copyright status templates. I.hate.spam.mail.here ( talk | contributions) 17:56, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please copy
Template:Non-free historic image/sandbox over
Template:Non-free historic image for |end_sentence=
.
Psiĥedelisto (
talk •
contribs) please always
ping!
06:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
or the agency employing the personcan be hidden if it's known the author was not employed by a agency. I see no reason not to implement this request. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:29, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
|end_sentence=
is rather vague — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk)
09:59, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
|agency=no
, it may seem more descriptive? (sandboxed and tested).
P.I. Ellsworth ,
ed.
put'er there
07:46, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
I suggest adding a |year= parameter, as in Template talk:Non-free biog-pic#Year published parameter, to allow images that are in the public domain (or soon to enter public domain) to be identified more easily. I took a stab at putting the relevant code in the sandbox but I am not experienced with testing these things out. Wikiacc ( ¶) 17:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC)