On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Paul Houle <[email protected]> wrote:
> Over the weekend I had some problem with causality. I found this > page on Commons, > > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pine_Grove_Springs_Hotel,_Spofford_Lake,_Chesterfield,_NH.jpg > > which claims to have gotten an image from my web site, > > > http://ookaboo.com/o/pictures/picture/1849742/Pine_Grove_Springs_Hotel_Spofford_Lake_i > > which in turn claims to have gotten the image from > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pine_Grove_Springs_Hotel,_Spofford_Lake,_Chesterfield,_NH.jpg > > which also claims to have gotten the picture from Ookaboo. > Obviously this doesn't make sense. Although this image is old enough > that we're not going to have anyone getting angry about attribution, > but our users deserve to have sensible provenance information for this > image. > > Ookaboo almost certainly got this image from Wikimedia Commons by > an automated process. It seems that somehow, Wikimedia Commons > re-imported the image from Ookaboo. > No, that's not the case. The picture was uploaded on commons from en:, where in turn it was uploaded by the specified user, who claims without reason to doubt it that it was scanned by him from an out-of-copyright source. Only several weeks _after_ it was copied from en: to commons the reference to ookaboo.com was added. -- André Engels, [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
