User talk:Ehsan1388

Images

It is ok and it should be deleted.I try to find a picture from my own collection.Thank you. 11:11, 16 January 2011 (IST)

I think the deletion is not proper. According to Iranian law media content produced by publicly funded organizations such as IRIN can be used without any copy rights as long as they are identified as such. It is very similar to any kind of media produced by government of US, which are extensively being used on wikipedia.--Irooniqermez (talk) 09:00, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not a lawyer, but looking at this category I don't see a template for PD Iran other than the usual expiration one, which makes me doubtful. Also, I haven't read through the entire law, can you point me to the exact section? --Muhandes (talk) 11:09, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Kish Air Show 2009.jpg

Delete this please!

Orphaned non-free image File:Iran space agency ofiicial logo.jpg

Delete this please!

File permission problem with File:Iran Space Lab.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Iran Space Lab.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

PLEASE NOTE EVERYBODY READING THIS:

All images from Mehrnews agency can be published to the public as far as you note the copyright and the name "Mehrnews Agency" .This has been clearly stated in their photo section of their website at the button of all pictures which says in Persian امانت داری و اخلاق مداری استفاده از این عکس(ها) فقط با ذکر منبع "خبرگزاری مهر" مجاز است. If you can not read Persian and do not know how to use Google translator then this is your problem. Deleting this picture which has all kinds of copyright, source and... is not acceptable and doing so I will officially complain to Wikimedia Headquarter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehsan1388 (talk • contribs)

Please calm down. Blustering is unhelpful. I tagged the image because the source website was down when I tried to check it. It was briefly back up again some time ago and I checked. I could find the source page of the image, but I could not find the phrase you cite anywhere on that site. If I overlooked it, please point me to the precise page where it says that. All I saw (on the English pages) was a normal copyright notice, i.e. all rights reserved. Without a better translation I'm also not sure it would actually constitute a free license, even if it does say it somewhere. It's inherently unlikely. That site is a commercial news agency. They presumably try to make money selling these images. It would be rather self-defeating if they gave them all away for free, don't you think? Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Dear Sir.I guess you do not have the right to delete an image immediately if you are unsure of its copyright state.I have provided all information regarding that picture but unfortunately you continued to do your personalized decision.I filed a complain against your act to Wikimedia foundation and also one of the administrators through my representative.Act of people like you discourage users from contributions.Also if you can not read Persian you should ask some who can to not to accuse a user of lying.And I have no idea about your country but in mines images that are published to the public through official or semi official agencies are free for everyone to use some by noting the copyright and some even without it.

Take a look at this: http://www.4freeimagehost.com/show.php?i=49507a033289.jpg— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehsan1388 (talk • contribs)

Can you give me the link to the Persian page where the actual image we are talking about is published, corresponding to this English one? As you can see, the English page has no such license notice. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I have asked for more comments about the licensing status at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. If there should be consensus that this phrase actually constitutes a free license in the sense of our Wikipedia copyright policies, then your image can of course be restored. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:08, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Google translate of "منبع "خبرگزاری مهر" مجاز است امانت داری و اخلاق مداری استفاده از این عکس(ها) فقط با ذکر" gives "Source "Mehr" is permissible circuit integrity and ethics may use (s) just mentioned", which is not entirely clear - it looks like Persian isn't a language that Google does particularly well -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

This is partly due to the fact that the phrase has been jumbled together from what in the original page is actually two phrases, due to confusing line breaking of mixed-directionality text. The actual phrase at issue appears to be "استفاده از این عکس(ها) فقط با ذکر منبع 'خبرگزاری مهر' مجاز است. ", which google-translates to a somewhat more intelligible "Use this photo (s) only to source "Mehr" is allowed." – Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:58, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Note: This user has blanked his page numerous times when being warned concerning images. He also had claimed they were his personal work to prevent them from being deleted which he has also blanked since.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 17:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

If you can prove this that i blanked my page to clear the warnings except once, I will leave now.When the conversations are finished and they are old i blank my page.Is this illegal?? I got one warning from a user complaining about pictures not my own work.I blanked the page as i didn't know how to response that user.I have noted this in my response.And as for images at least I have been truthful when asked.I voluntarily responded and asked for deletion.Ehsan1388 11:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

You've blanked this page at least 4 times that I can see. The point in my post is that this has been a repeated issue here. Blanking means that you have acknowledged the previous messages. In other words, it isn't an entirely a new issue. Why would you feel the need to leave because of this?

• Replaced content with "Hello"
• Blanked page
• Again
• and again
  ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 20:38, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Just to clarify, nobody is blaming you for blanking your page – it's not forbidden. We were just talking about the fact that you have had trouble with making correct image uploads before, and this [1] image in particular leads me to believe you didn't really understand the problem about these uploads. – Now, can I repeat my request please, could you find the page where the image we were talking about appears directly together with that Persian permission phrase? Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:49, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Warning

By the way, I take it that you are also the IP editor 80.191.64.2 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). In that case, let me strongly warn you against repeating anything like this. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:19, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Again ,Accusing me of vandalism.I also took this into consideration in my email.I am not interested to politics .take a look at my contribution first and take some network courses to know that Many of IPs are shared zillion times a day.A copy of this conversation has been attached to the email.

Far less than a zillion. That IP is fixed and belongs to the Industries and Mines Organization which is on the 6th Floor, 2nd Montazeri Complex Bldg, Africa Sq, Tehran, Iran.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 17:05, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Looks like you are really off the road.have you heard the name ICP ever? If you don't know better to learn now that the Industries and Mines Organization (which do not exist in that address anyway) is responsible for providing more that 30 percent of Internet traffic here!!And also better to learn that when a country filter out Internet bandwidth ips and whois show wrong information.It is not a good practice to accuse people when your evidences are not complete like your friend.Ehsan1388 11:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's just a bit strange, because all the other edits from that IP happened in direct vicinity of edits of your own ([2]

[3], [4]), so it looks rather like this is your personal IP. But whatever, if that vandal edit wasn't you but somebody else on your network, that's fine – as long as there won't be edits like this from you in the future, all is well. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:46, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Although it is of no use explaining such things to guys like you but anyway just to not accuse others of lying or whatever try to read and learn about ISP Proxy and try not to piffle anymore.--Ehsan1388 (talk) 18:03, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Good faith

Hi everyone. I'm truly not here to make any accusations, but I felt compelled to say a word. If you check the history of this page you will see it was me who initiated the previous deletion discussions. In the end, my personal belief from the previous incidents was that Ehsan1388 truthfully did not understand the copyright rules, and that once explained he came forward and asked for files to be removed. Following that, I believe he intends well and deserves good faith. Again, I am not accusing anyone of bad faith, I just think we should continue to keep good faith in mind. Best regards, and happy editing to everyone. --Muhandes (talk) 07:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Ehsan! I'm very sorry you're having so much trouble over this. I'm sure you mean well, and I want to thank you for your contributions. To be honest, our rules on Wikipedia about how to include images are very confusing to me, and I've been here quite a long time, now. I constantly see new users have trouble with uploading images, and they very often feel frustrated or angry when someone like Future Perfect questions or objects to the image they want to add. I think most of the problem comes from the fact that copyright laws in the United States are so different from much of the rest of the world, something you mentioned briefly in the discussion above. Because Wikipedia's servers are located in the state of Florida, in the United States, we all have to keep to U.S. copyright laws, which are much more strict than most other places in the world. Part of the reason for that is so that other so-called "mirror" sites that copy Wikipedia's free content can do so safely, so they won't be sued under U.S. copyright law, in other words, and so Wikipedia won't be sued for violating those laws, either. If we didn't stick to those laws very, very carefully, it's likely that Wikipedia would be sued so often that it would have to shut down.

But I think I do understand, a little, about how very frustrating all this must be to you. All you want to do is help improve Wikipedia by adding some great images to it. I really appreciate that, truly, and I know other users here appreciate it, too. Also, I can see from the "conversation" above that there has been some anger about this, some frustration on both sides, I think. I wonder, though, if you can please try to understand Future Perfect's motives? He's not trying to make your life difficult, and even though the conversation about this has been ... let us say "a little difficult", he's really a pretty good guy. He's a volunteer, like all of us here, and one of the tasks he takes on is to try to make sure that the images that get uploaded here don't get us (Wikipedia) in trouble, that they don't get us sued under U.S. copyright law. It's a pretty tough job, in my opinion: I certainly wouldn't have the patience to do it myself. I'd be very likely, I think, when someone didn't seem to understand the importance of staying inside the very strict U.S. copyright law, to just say something like, "Oh, be quiet and stop bothering me!" ( See, I was telling the truth when I said I wouldn't be able to do Future Perfect's work here! ;-)

I think if you had any idea about the huge, huge number of images that people try to load onto Wikipedia every day, and knew how few of those actually meet the requirements of U.S. copyright laws, that you might have a little more patience with Future Perfect. He really is just trying to do what's right for Wikipedia, rather than trying to give you a difficult time. So I hope you'll just ignore all the stuff that has been said about other IP addresses, and all that. ( If anyone cares, I also happen to think the former government official mentioned is a war criminal, but that's only my personal opinion, and it can't go into a Wikipedia article unless he is convicted of that by a court of law, of course. I don't think you added that, but I'll just say that expressing one's own personal opinon by adding it to an article in such a way really is a pretty serious violation of our policies here. )

Anyway, if you can put your anger about this to one side, I think Future Perfect really might be able to help you with this, if you'll realize that he has no personal choice about our rules. He has to just enforce them the way they are, and I, for one, appreciate his willingness to do so. Will you please try to let what's in the past between you be forgotten, and see if you can work in a better way with him to try to get your images included, or to listen carefully to his explanation if it turns out that they they can't be included because of our very strict U.S. copyright laws? ( Is there a saying in Persian like "That's water (that has run by) under the bridge"? Or maybe, "Let sleeping dogs lie"? ) I'll try to check back here tomorrow, for any reply you might like to leave. Once again, I really do sympathize with your frustration about this and I'm sure I'd feel the same way, but please do try to understand that the rules that Future Perfect has to enforce are probably much stricter than you're used to in your homeland. Thanks, once more, for trying to include the images to improve the encyclopedia. Even though the process has been frustrating, I predict that you'll soon come to understand it very well after you've gone through it a few more times. Maybe then you can volunteer to help other users who are from countries with easier copyright laws, and who want to upload pictures, understand how to do that? And maybe you can let me know, too, because there's certainly much about the whole process that's confusing to me, as well. Best regards!  – OhioStandard (talk) 12:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Dear Ohiostandard, First of all thing I appreciate your friendly tone.At least someone in this discussion respect others.I really do not want to prolong this topic but please let me defend myself.And please bare in mind that i fully respect copyright law specially when it comes to other's responsibility and I do whatever I can to not to put wikipedia into trouble.

According to wikipedia's own rule an image should be deleted after one week not immediately and not when you don't have enough proof about copyright violation ( as far as i have understood)

Assuming that I have done something wrong! No body no matter who he/she is, has the right to insult and accuse people of vandalism and lying.I repeat again that I was not responsible for that "Warcrime" edit.I think i have already explained this enough (regarding IP and Whois data)

At the beginning of my contributions I had problem understanding the rules/laws therefore I uploaded couple of images without proper authorization.A friendly user Muhandes came and asked about that, i explained to him what I have done and he convinced me that it is not legal.I asked him to delete images.other picture have also been removed today.Did I complain about that?

As for my recent upload I first made sure that this act does not violate copyright both in my country and US and then I uploaded the picture.And i think I have already presented enough information about my act.If you are not accusing me of lying again I explain here now:

Mehrnews agency is a semi official agency belonging to سازمان تبلیغات اسلامی .You can find more information about this organization at http://www.ido.ir/en/default.aspx .You can also find related website of this organization at http://www.ido.ir/myhtml/rl.aspx.

According to the information in the Persian page of mehrnews all news and photos can be used freely as far as you note the source.I have translated that and posted here as a picture.If you do not trust me you can ask someone else to translate it for you.

I believe that the picture has had enough proof that it can be used here as far as we note that this comes from this agency.

Therefore what I kindly ask is the restoration of the picture and the fact that those users have insulted me and accused me of lying and vandalism without any proper evidence.Maybe reading this ( intends well ) by those users and a simple apology was like water onto the fire.such behavior (No matter who we are) discourage people from contributions and ruin the spirit of Wikipedia.

And...please take this into consideration that i am just a simple guy with nothing in hand trying to help others and is not interested in lying and vandalism.

I once again thank you for your kind and friendly tone and I hope you excuse me for all this war of nerves.

Thank you

--Ehsan1388 (talk) 08:17, 13 February 2011 (Local Time)

Hi again, Ehsan. Thank you for your kind reply. I did not intend to make it seem like I doubt you at all; I do not think you're interested in lying or vandalism, and I'm really very sorry if I gave you that idea. I'm very much in a hurry right now, but I will look at this very carefully within the next 24 hours and see if there's anything I can do to help. I understand that in a "war of nerves" people sometimes say things they would not say when they are calm. I just experienced that with a different user, and it's difficult, I know. But (forgive me) I am really in a hurry right now. I promise to study this very carefully, and I will reply again within 24 hours. Also, thank you for writing in English. I wish I could write in Persian, or one of the other languages you might be able to use. I should tell you, too, that I am not an administrator here, but I think I might be able to help anyway, depending on what I learn when I look into this matter with the care that it deserves. Very best regards,  – OhioStandard (talk) 17:19, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Ehsan, I've looked into this a little more now. I think it would have been polite to tell me that you'd asked two other users for their assistance in this matter, too. My time is valuable, and if I had known that you had asked other editors, editors who are more experienced than I am about copyright matters, to help with this, I would not have volunteered. You might like to review my comments here, however. If it can be determined that the 12 January, 1970 Iranian copyright law is still in effect, then it seems to me that the image can be allowed on Wikipedia. It will be up to you to show that this law is still in force in Iran, however. I will have no further involvement with this matter.  – OhioStandard (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello Sir, I am truly, truly sorry from deepest part of my heart for what I have done and the trouble i have caused for you and my other friends.I really didn't mean it.I asked muhandes and another editor to help.the editor said you are canvasing.I emailed wikimedia and they didn't answered.I emailed mehrnews agency 3 times and they didn't answered.You are right i am a ruffled feathers man for just being called lier and vandal.I once again apologize and i am ready to face whatever the result of my work is.I really do not want to put you in trouble.If i should come and explain this anywhere please just let me know.I am really sorry for being a pain in the neck for you.I will not leave anymore message .But i didn't lied about that damn picture and i didn't ruined that political article.Again please accept my apology.

Thank you for all your hard work --Ehsan1388 (talk) 18:40, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Apology accepted. I don't think you're a liar and I don't think you're a vandal. I only felt annoyed because I didn't want to try to do the same work other people were also doing. But thanks for your efforts in this, and for your gentle reply, above. I also don't think this problem is your fault, and I don't think you have to explain anywhere. This is not really a big problem, and I don't think you need to worry that you've done something wrong. The rules about copyright on Wikipedia are very complicated; I've just spent another 30 minutes or so reading some of our articles on the subject. ( Type WP:COPYRIGHT into the search box, to find them. ) I still don't entirely understand, but my thought right now is ... no, I won't even say how I think our rules apply to this; it would probably take another couple of hours for me to read through our policy pages that apply to this. The clearest thing I can say is that I don't understand the rules. But the discussion on this is where the matter will get resolved, if anywhere, I think. I'm really outside my area of understanding on this, though, so I think the best thing I can do right now is to wish you good luck, and to thank you, once again, for your desire to improve Wikipedia. Oh; I'll also say, please don't feel bad about all this. There's not an area on Wikipedia that causes more trouble than copyright issues for new users who are only trying to improve the encyclopedia. I see problems like this come up for people very, very often. Cheers,  – OhioStandard (talk) 21:45, 14 February 2011 (UTC)