User talk:Mike Peel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mike Peel (talk | contribs) at 13:42, 21 April 2024 (→‎Commons deletion of photographs of scarecrows in the UK: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to my talk page. Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page, use headlines when starting new talk topics and sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. I will generally reply on this page to keep conversations together; please watch this page for a short time after leaving a comment. Uncivil comments will be reverted without response. Thank you.

Start a new talk topic.

Wikidata weekly summary #622

Tech News: 2024-16

MediaWiki message delivery 23:27, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commons deletion of photographs of scarecrows in the UK

Please would you kindly look at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests: Please undelete these Minskip files.

Since I took the photographs in the Category:Minskip scarecrow competition 2023, there have been intermittent attempts to delete my photographs. Sometimes my objections have been listened to; sometimes they have been misunderstood or ignored and my photographs (taken with knowledge and verbal permission of the festival director) have been deleted. I believe that the problem is that there has been a lot of misunderstanding of UK law going on.

I understand that the rules for requesting undeleting permit me to request an administrator to take a look at the situation. So I am asking you whether you could please take a look at this. It is very worrying that we have been allowed to photograph e.g. the Lewes Guy Fawkes effigy parade for all these years, and publish those photographs, and we have been allowed to photograph scarecrows all these years, and suddenly one or two people are able to delete our photographs. We really do need some clarity here, so that they and I can know where we stand - and all those people who have uploaded photos of effigies to Commons all these years, also can know where they stand. Thanks.

I should add that maybe definition of terms comes into this. The scarecrow effigies are not created as artworks. They are just a bit of temporary fun. I have personally called them artworks in the image file descriptions, because as naive works they often inadvertently take on some character and even beauty, and really it is the camera work which interprets it that way. If there is any beauty in the effigies, it is unlikely to be appreciated fully by passers by, without the intervention of my camera work. Storye book (talk) 21:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see @Billinghurst: is on the case, and is much more of an expert in this than I am. :-) From a quick look, it does look like a bit of a grey area - these aren't simple scarecrows, but almost giant fluffy toys. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 13:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]