Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Isabeljohnson25

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Isabeljohnson25 (talk · contribs)[edit]

File:Antipodes Submersible.jpg has been on the Internet since at least 2013 (see here, for example). There is even a 2014 result from OceanGate official website (contact-oceangate.html - First found on Oct 16, 2014, according to TinEye). This makes me wonder uploader simply uploaded some low-profile copyvios. Per COM:PCP, I am sorry (don’t wanna be the estraga-prazeres), but I do think the Cyclops image should be deleted as well.

RodRabelo7 (talk) 23:41, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep It seems that Isabel Johnson is one of OceanGate's pilots and technicians. No reason for me not to give her credit when she claims to be the author of the photographs (although exif data would have been a plus). --Madelgarius (talk) 07:51, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete There's zero reason to believe the uploader is really Isabel Johnson. In fact, it's pretty likely they aren't. Really, why would she use her real name to a upload a couple of images to a random website? So the images should be deleted baring actual evidence that the uploader is in fact Isabel Johnson. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:50, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep there is actual very strong evidence that the uploader is the same Isabel Johnson, including serious paid editing accusations on the OceanGate article, another apparent paid editor at the same article, and several edits by the uploader to other articles about OceanGate products. There are also similar photos taken by AP showing the connection between IJ and the submersibles. Of course those photos are copyrighted and can't be used here, but they do establish a clear connection between the uploader, the company, and the submersibles. If for any reason you do decide to delete this here, please inform me so that I can move it to enWiki. Smallbones (talk) 15:06, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete Unless the uploader can provide hi rez version with EXIF data. Admin should speedy delete until then.--Zindra Lord (talk) 01:22, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've declined speedy deletion in light of the facts presented here; it does not look like a clear copyvio due to other information known about the user, but we need to address COM:PRP concerns to keep this. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:32, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment Does this mean that photographers are banned from CC-ing low-res copies of their work for WMF, because they have to give us the full-rez photos that they make livings from? That would seem to be bad practise, as a photog should be able to provide whatever version they want to provide under the appropriate CC-license that is WMF compatible, and not go bankrupt for us instead, getting turfed out onto the streets -- 67.70.25.80 00:11, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    IP has a good point here. By the way, if a photographer licenses a low-resolution version of one of their works under a CC license, can we use a high-resolution version as if it was also licensed under that same license? What does CC have to say about that? RodRabelo7 (talk) 02:58, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep per Madelgarius and Smallbones. I don't think there is significant doubt that this is Isabel Johnson, so I don't think COM:PCP applies. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think this would set a bad precedent. When I opened this deletion request, I was not aware of the history of the account that uploaded the images, and now I prefer to be  Neutral here. However, I truly believe that keeping images based on this argumentation would enable trolls to upload copyright violations and pretend some relation to the subject of the photo, thus allowing copyright violations to be kept on Commons. RodRabelo7 (talk) 02:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. Normally, we require VRT verification if someone says they represent some company and can release copyrighted content under a free license. Unfortunately, as the company has suspended all operations after the disaster, there's no one we can ask over there. However, in this case, I think there is enough circumstantial evidence to indicate that the uploader was indeed an employee. Firstly, this user created the en:OceansGate article in 2015, back when the company was very obscure and the original content was copied from their press releases. Adamant1 asks, why would she use her real name to a upload a couple of images to a random website? Why not? I've used my real name since I started editing here in 2005, and in 2015, Wikipedia was not anywhere near "a random website". Conversely, what are the odds that a troll user would to coincidentally choose a username that matches a low-level employee of the company that they are writing about? And while there is some worry about setting a precedent, as we have seen some people go to extraordinary lengths in order to fool us, absent any other evidence, en:Occam's Razor should apply. —holly {chat} 17:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Isabeljohnson25&oldid=817860481"