User talk:Rodolph/Archive4

584:

else, had an influence on the artist. In fact, this exhibition - a story about the difficult fate of pyatidesyatidvuhletnego Aksenov. Talk to the legendary commune Trekhprudny, he emigrated from Russia to France in 1993. Soon connection broke off, heard only vague rumors Pasha moved to England, the poor, insane, and was treated at the clinic for the mentally ill. In 2008, he was suddenly deported to Russia and was sent to his native Izhevsk, where he has since lived with his mother in a two-bedroom apartment.

1478: 972:- A wreath I feel qualifies as a work of artistic craftsmanship so Freedom of Panorama applies, In terms of context and scope, I feel it would be reasonable to include an image of the wreath in the article on the figure concerned, It would be my suggestion that a memorial of this nature be sensitively considered in the section about an individuals passing, especially if it's a wreath in respect of a former unit with which the individual served. 1547: 1786: 2024: 1947: 1416:, the owners are required to give some sort of access, very varied, from, say, six months a year to never, because it might be one inconsequential portrait or salver in a flat that no one asks to see. As part of the need to allow some sort of access, sensibly this amount of access is grey, as explained, the owners could be encouraged to put images of their exempt things on Knowledge. 927: 1380:

Given the issues you've experienced in respect of some material (to which the reviews on your talk page previously attest), there is also the consideration that some archives may be reluctant to contribute a project they feel is run by those lacking certain forms of credibility or integrity. This is

583:

Visual Thesis Paul Aksenova Posted 13-02-2012 at 02:09 by ART4.RU opened in Izhevsk ; man show Pavel Aksenov, a legendary party trehprudnenskoy commune. In the White Room Gallery of the newspaper "Izvestia of the Udmurt Republic" posted twenty graphic sheets, each of which depicts the work of someone

1372:

This made me wonder, if there were other 'private collections' in 'libraries' which contain public domain works, or archive materials that were not necessarily preserved in better known archives or collections, whilst still being relevant to scholarly and academic researchers. It is also noted that

932:

Scrolling back through it appears be a scanned version of one of the volumes of an Early 18th century work called "The peerage of England: or, an historical and genealogical account of the present nobility ... continu'd down to this present year, 1709 ... Collected as well from our best historians,

1900:

ok, but I did'nt have any notice that this was wrong, or unfree, as I don't have a Watch notice on that page, so I must have put it back without realising it had been taken down twice before by you. (I've asked to be sent a copy of the original of that file for my records). What else can I remove

1376:

Given that you have contributed archive material from your own families collection (some letters in particular, for which you are due thanks.), I felt it would be reasonable to ask if it was worth asking the wider Knowledge community including yourself on how "family and estate archives" could be

1572:

and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the

1025:- Given the age this one would clearly be PD-art, Was there a quality issue which led to it's deletion?. I would consider it reasonable to retain old portraits that are of persons related to those that have articles, even if the subject of portrait may not necessarily have their own article yet. 2231:

thank you! Splendid information. (Though it is an interesting act of faith to load up a whole book, and then to watch it then being effortlessly 're-sold' on ebay or abebooks, print-on-demand, for £30 or so. But worth it all the same). Thanks esp. for the info re. potential bulb damage. I've an

2111:

was written by a Henry de Salis. He died in 1936, ( so the work he wrote in 1918 would have expired under EU copyrights, as well as being in the public domain in the US. Much as it would be reasonable to consider the 1928 work, I wasn't sure if it had a US publication, and subsequent renewal.)

1102:

In respect of the other images which seemed to have been deleted over 'permissions' concerns, It seems a reasonable suggestion would be to encourage the apparent owners to re-send the permissions e-mails, Whilst it is unfortunate and regretable, things do ocassionally get lost in the system.

2164:

Well, it depends on what you have access to. I've personally scanned an old book in using a flatbed scanner (which takes a while). Flat-bed Scanners will typically save scans in a format called TIFF (or if color possibly JPEG). Depending on the software used this will either be single page

1198:

You've obviously got some great sources and some really good images that can be used and to lose them or you because of the arcaneness and complexities of international copyright law would be a real pity. (I've added this page to my watchlist, so you can reply here and I will be aware of it)

1338:

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the

1179:

Rodolph, there seems to be a lot going on here and I'm not sure where to begin. I don't want to teach granny to suck eggs and go back to all the basics of copyright and Knowledge image use unless you want me or anyone else to do so. I also don't want to bombard you with lots of specific

928:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=yKlVAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA228&lpg=PA228&dq=1st+Viscount+Ffane&source=bl&ots=Vzc0pyFdeT&sig=nAFge4BrwOxiVp6dTYImkq53T7o&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gpp4U56uH8WhO83JgMAL&ved=0CDsQ6AEwBDgK#v=onepage&q=1st%20Viscount%20Ffane&f=false

303:

OK, I've asked an admin to take a look, If there was an e-mail sent to the OTRS permission queue for any of these it would be useful to know. If not, I would strongly advise sending either an e-mail or letter about these. Others have advised about what would be required in such letters.

933:

publick records, and other sufficient authorities; as from the personal informations of most of the nobility. To which is prefix'd an introduction of the present Royal Family of Great-Britain, trac'd thro' its several branches down to this time, etc. Compiled by Arthur Collins"

350:, is this likely to be an official photo? (If so, then I think WMF has HMSO on record as saying they understood crown works prior to around 1950 to be unenceumbered.) If it's not an offical photo, then it may need some additional investigation to show it's truly anonymous. 1452:

is the portal which is the 'entry-point' for co-ordination of a number of GLAM projects. You might want to address some of your response to my enquiry to volunteers and contributors there, a number it seems who have connections to expertise I could never claim to have.

1334:

or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

364:

I don't think this is an official photo. It's a tight headshot with him with sunglasses and smiling. The texture indicates that this is not a scan of the original photo but is instead a scan of a printed reproduction, so we are many steps away from the source -

1597: 397:

although without further comment, I'm not sure what constitutes 'notable' in terms of collectible items. ( As a side note here, I will note that in addition to decoys, wild-fowl were ocassionaly the subject of 3d artworks, and in one instance an automata.)

2119:

If a suitable scanned (or better OCR) version could be provided, transcription of an important work on Inland Waterways (The article where I got the name from notes he gave evidence to a Royal Commission on the subject) could be attempted for Wikisource.

2049: 1972: 764:

almost certainly copyrighted. Even if the subject is correct you can't be sure this is in the public domain until 70 years after the end of his service...say 2018 to be safe. If the photographer is discoverable then it may be in copyright for much

222:

1591: 1192:

Make a list of the areas that you feel there may be some confusion around. At this stage I don't mean specific images but genral topics, like attribution, copyright of deceased persons etc that can be discussed and then we can move onto

387:,Depending on quality, the image would be useful in supporting commentary (if it were written) on the use of 'decoy' models in other forms of wild-fowl hunting or capture, something that I understand was undertaken on "estates" in Britan. 1402:

thank you for writing. I'm pondering your question, as how to encourage contribution. I'd think that most archives would love to put their stuff here, as nowhere is less stagnant, nor better in terms of sharing and gaining from that

936:

Whilst it may be a work of which you were already aware, I thought it was reasonable to leave a mention of it here, given that the Google Books interface, appears to make suggestions as to related works of a similar nature or age.

594:

For the action entitled, Sea of Vodka (Aksenov, Reunov and Ter-Oganian), the magnificent painter Valery Koshlyakov painted a splendid wave on one of the Gallery’s walls, in front of which was placed a table with cups of vodka.

1491: 2115:

Previously on Wikisource, an early 19th century Bradshaw guide to the Canals and Navigable Waterways was already transcribed, (and I am currently working slowly at getting a very early Bradshaw rail timetable transcribed.).

863:

OTRS found, image restored (see above), updated the information. Noted the biographical article on the subject had no image so I added the image back. Image flagged as a commons transfer. Should this file be renamed?

793:

Only if we have an article that needs an out-of-focus, tightly framed image of only the heads to two weathered polystyrene decoys against a red background. Seriously though this image is never going to find use here -

420:

1535: 2382:- Image is early 19th century, but a rough year would be nice. The source link given appeared to be a dead one for me, otherwise I would have consulted it. The article on the Swiss artist is sadly only a stub. 1789:

Thank you for contributing to Knowledge. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically

2232:

ordinary scanner or else could use a camera on a tripod, and then snap away...whole albums, books, lifetimes of correspondence. Exciting prospect. I had'nt really taken in Wikisource until you mentioned it.

1373:

some "estates" (including those of the National Trust and English Heritage) hold historic works of art (and of craftmanship), which whilst significant may not be widely known to a wider academic community.

1791: 1148:

This should hopefully bring the issue of the relevant images to the attention of some more experienced contributors, who will be able to advise on the more arcane aspects of Knowledge image policy.

137: 1137:

Although, I am applying common-sense, I am starting to feel a little out of my depth on some technical aspects of Knowledge image policy at the moment, I've therefore asked for some wider views at

2123:

I am writing to you about this because Wikisource prefers 1st printings (if not 1st editions) and it was felt you might be in a good position to advise on where suitable scans might be obtained.

95: 1281: 282: 113: 2396: 1369:) that the National Trust should consider developing an appropriate scholarly access program to works held in country house libraries (some of which can be extensive private collections). 1142: 1620: 1586: 2414: 1017:-3D object, FoP possibly applicable, Potential use would in an article disscussing either the owners, or the house (Depending on the scale or importance of architectural work shown.) 923:

Having asked for information, I thought it was reasonable for once to mention something that may be of interest in bolstering historical/genealogical research you've contributed to.

2045: 1968: 1744: 1022: 724: 126: 74: 1740: 1145:(Your are being told of this because WP:ANI's guidelines state I am supposed to let those who may be the subject of discussions there know in the interests of transparency.) 166: 1325: 119: 1252: 1355: 759: 347: 259: 217: 83: 2426: 175: 2193:

I will note that for really old material (Typically pre 18th Century) , the lighting used must be 'appropriate', as certain types of lamp can damage old documents.

1014: 695: 507:- The painter shown is possibly a Pavel Askenov. Google produced some Russian language sources on that name. I don't read Russian, so it needs some clarifications. 461: 56: 1058: 857: 735: 710: 380: 232: 198: 104: 2409:

because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the

184: 1095: 633: 504: 47: 1061:- I am willing , given the uploaders many contributions on relevant related articles to assume good faith here in respect of the information presented here. 2321: 1462: 1441: 1726: 2339: 821:

OK. If it's an issue of image quality.. Perhaps we can ask the uploader if they have a better image? (Decoys are notable, just not out of focuse ones.)

700:

photo of a model house with a (?) wax snowman in front. - deleted as orphaned with no forseeable use. Is there a page you can see this being used in ?

433:

OK. If it's an issue of image quality.. Perhaps we can ask the uploader if they have a better image? (Decoys are notable, just not out of focuse ones.)

334:

I've gone through them all. four are restored (one because it looked useful, three I found a related OTRS email). For the rest see my comments above -

157: 61:

photo of a model house with a (?) wax snowman in front. - deleted as orphaned with no forseeable use. Is there a page you can see this being used in ?

32: 2369: 2335: 2174:

I would suggest asking on the English Wikisource Scriptorum, as contributors there have more experience with the tools needed for document capture.

410: 313: 1774: 341: 148: 2272: 1157: 2253: 2153: 1798:. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our 1711: 1681: 1525: 1425: 1126: 1663: 801: 549: 2218: 2202: 1366: 891: 516: 473: 2410: 2402: 1185:

This talk page is getting rather long. Why don't you copy and paste everything that is from February this year or earlier and archive it at

535: 485: 442: 428: 372: 359: 2311: 2289: 2260:

As you were an art historian, I figured you might be able to help out on expanding the description, (and possibly the provenance) of this.

2241: 1174: 478:

No idea which building this is supposed to be. It's slightly similar to, but not the same as, the building you mentioned in North Devon. -

327: 1637: 1120: 1081: 1005: 647: 1569: 1554: 1540: 1208: 880: 2445: 1924: 1910: 1891: 1877: 1861: 1847: 1697: 1046: 1293:

all photos taken by me but a small part of each photo includes book covers by someone else. All had/would have good places on the site.

990: 961:(Apologies for what seems to have been an edit conflict.) Thank you, this is a further response, ( I will assume the other contributor 464:- Where was this a representation of? There are some references on Google to a not immediatly notable Tidicombe House in North Devon? 1263: 1242: 1228: 951: 2349: 1915:

Upon a quick look, I do not find any other unfree files on that page, so I don't think that more action currently is needed there. --

1754: 771:

A clarification as to them being Dove decoys or Pegion decoys is probably desirable, but could be resolved in appropriate captioning.

401:

A clarification as to them being Dove decoys or Pegion decoys is probably desirable, but could be resolved in appropriate captioning.

1503: 913: 2254: 2134: 1868:

Only today was it declared non-free. So I may have put it on that page with that in mind. I think your tone is rather aggressive?

1835: 1645: 1392: 956: 642: 588: 1494:) from family and personal collections. Without such contributions articles on their subjects or creators would be diminished. 1365:

It was noted in an external item for the Knowledge Library project newsletter for March 2014 the specific etxernal item being (

873: 1536: 2342:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 2209:

From a technical perspective, at minimum old documents should be 300-600dpi full page color scans.(per the link I give above).

1747:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 2345: 1882:

The file has been listed as unfree since 17 May and you have inserted it on the page at least three times after that date. --

1750: 1561:, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image. 2183: 2379: 1803: 918: 830: 780: 2391: 665: 2165:

scans(TIFF or JPEG), or a multipage TIFF. For document purposes Commons apparently prefers an archival format called

1651: 2094: 2017: 1600:), you can feel free to revert it, if needed. I did tilt-correction as well as brightness and contrast edits. Best, 851: 623: 2406: 1732: 1350: 1340: 897: 528:

Could be but we really need the image's creator to clearly identify it. The only hint is in the image's title. -

1815: 2169:, There are software tools that will convert TIFF (and JPEG) to Djvu (although they can be complex to set up). 2326:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

1731:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

856: 2048:

again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on

1971:

again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on

715:

was deleted as orphaned and no forseeable encyclopedic use. Is there a page you can see this being used in ?

109:

was deleted as orphaned and no forseeable encyclopedic use. Is there a page you can see this being used in ?

1367:

http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/04/14/public-access-to-public-books-the-case-of-the-national-trust/

638:

the subject (painter) is not identified. Was deleted as there was no forseeable use without identification.

262:(Lord Jellicoe-public figure. Photo by his brother-in-law, Sir Thomas Dunne, KG, who has given permission) 65: 52:

the subject (painter) is not identified. Was deleted as there was no forseeable use without identification.

1412:

In the meantime regarding chattels and other things that have been given 'conditional exemption from tax'

1628:

that's useful, thanks, to have both, one showing its good Georgian frame, and your nice and straight one.

1468: 1331: 89: 1598:

File:Portrait of a man of the Bisse, or associated, family, and two women, by Arthur Devis (1712-87).jpg

2130: 1707: 1659: 1574: 1499: 1458: 1437: 1388: 1216: 1186: 394: 1189:(click on the redlink to create the page). That will get rid of a lot of very old, very stale notices. 187:(Nick Thackeray, has given permission for all the above photos. -OTRS-possibly not, can't remember) - 1582: 1134:

Your patient response to what must seem like a vast number of questions and queries is commendable,

2099: 1360: 1346: 1035: 969: 898: 608: 250: 38: 1573:

speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

1592:

Portrait of hitherto unidentified members of Bisse-Challoner's family by Arthur Devis (1712-87)

577: 589:

http://www.divus.cc/london/en/article/trekhprudny-time-to-ask-naive-questions?printLayout=true

2126: 1703: 1655: 1495: 1454: 1433: 1384: 241: 2082: 2005: 613:

deleted as orphaned with no forseeable use. Is there a page you can see this being used in ?

43:

deleted as orphaned with no forseeable use. Is there a page you can see this being used in ?

2387: 2307: 2268: 2214: 2198: 2179: 2090: 2013: 1578: 1251:

I still don't understand. Can anyone please explain. I've just seen some images of work by

1153: 1108: 947: 909: 887: 869: 826: 776: 602: 545: 512: 469: 438: 406: 355: 309: 8: 2441: 2374: 2285: 2237: 2149: 1906: 1873: 1857: 1828: 1693: 1677: 1654:, is located. It would be great one day if possible to get a better image. Many thanks. ( 1633: 1613: 1521: 1421: 1259: 1224: 1170: 1116: 1077: 1042: 1002: 986: 847: 798: 661: 619: 532: 482: 425: 369: 338: 323: 2144:

thanks for asking. There is much stuff I'd love to scan and load up. How does one do it?

1143:

Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Reviewing_image_uploads_by_User:Rodolph

384: 296: 235:(photo by Philippa Jellicoe/Dunne, his widow, who has given permission, indirect OTRS) 1492:

File:Hepplewhite shield-shaped dining chair in 'country house' condition, May 2014.jpg

2422: 2365: 2356:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

2327: 2109:

Bradshaw's Canals & Navigable Rivers of England & Wales, 1904, 1918 and 1928.

1940: 1920: 1887: 1843: 1811: 1795: 1770: 1761:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

1180:

queries/clarifiactions either. Can I make a couple of suggestions to start off with?

17: 2263:

It was (wrongly) described as being by a David Allan, when it's by a William Allan.

2190: 1779: 268: 2383: 2303: 2264: 2210: 2194: 2175: 2086: 2037: 2028: 2009: 1960: 1951: 1238: 1204: 1149: 1104: 943: 905: 883: 865: 822: 772: 677:

Title of photo: -Nik/Pavel Aksenov, aka 'Quite useful art geezer: 'Rudolf Storage

541: 523: 508: 465: 434: 402: 351: 305: 1558: 1557:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

1413: 1377:

encouraged to contribute to "Gallery, Library and Museum (GLAM)" type projects?

1254:

Giovanni Giamcometti who died in 1933 on Wiki Commons. Why is this not deleted?

122:. Same resolution, same scan quality, differs only by a few pixels in placement. 2081:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow

2004:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow

1823:

but they are not non-free, please explain. What does multichill mean anyway?!!!

1799: 1601: 1449: 999: 962: 795: 744: 529: 479: 422: 366: 335: 207: 2331: 1138: 1111:) 22:47, 18 May 2014 (UTC) (:::thank you.. I'm deeply impressed and grateful. 292: 1596:

Greetings Rodolph! I've uploaded a newer version of a file you've uploaded (

1490:

In respect of your contributions of works of art and craftsmanship (such as

1381:

something a consultation with the Knowledge community could also consider.

287: