Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tunyuan Trailhead.jpg
No FOP for artistic works in Taiwan. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:29, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: Why do you think it is a public art work?--Kai3952 (talk) 08:24, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Kai3952: The image on the framed wood paneling, depicting hikers / climbers ascending a snow-covered mountain, is art. It is not covered by COM:FOP#Taiwan. Therefore, it is probably copyrighted (barring a license from the artist), newish (wood art doesn't survive long outside, and we have no evidence it's out of copyright), and therefore not allowed here. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:19, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: It seems that Wikimedia.Commons has a very broad definition of "Art". Almost 99% of photos takeing public art works are not allowed to be uploaded. So what should I do?--Kai3952 (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Kai3952: Not upload such works. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:29, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: I know what you say but this is difficult to do. Because the "art" is ubiquitous, it often happens that they think it should not be deleted and we have deleted it. If I do what you say, it is very easy to cause controversy. The consequence is that I was treated as a vandalism by them. For example: the Chinese temples, the aesthetic bridges, the wall decorated with colorful graffiti, the train stations with a sense of design.....have long been integrated into public buildings, so we can hardly judge it is art or not. When I said "they" and "them", I meant the uploaders from Taiwan or the edit users from Chinese Wikipedia.--Kai3952 (talk) 17:42, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Kai3952: Art and buildings in Taiwan are treated identically by the "Copyright Act" (1992-2016-present) Article 58: commercial use is not allowed. If this was mistranslated at this government website from the Chinese original, please let me know. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 07:54, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: I don't mean that. I mean that I have exemplified the buildings are not used for artistic purposes, but their appearance has an artistic design. If you don't understand what I say, please look at the picture below:
- The aesthetic bridges, see: File:Starlight Bridge East Side 20170327a.jpg and File:Taitung-County Taiwan Sansiantai-Bridge-02.jpg
- The train stations with a sense of design, see: File:新城車站(1).jpg
- The paifangs, see: File:Taroko Archway,taken by Roller Coaster Philosophy.jpg
- The amusement parks, see: File:Entrance to Formosan Aboriginal Culture Village.JPG
- The tourist attractions, see: File:彰化八卦山大佛.jpg and File:台湾 故宫 - panoramio.jpg
- The monuments and memorials, see: File:2010 07 23180 7133 Zhongzheng District, Taipei, Chiang Kai-shek Park, Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, Buildings, Taiwan.JPG
- The Chinese temples, see: File:鐵線橋通濟宮舊廟.JPG
- The Chinese graden, see: File:臺南吳園水榭.JPG
- The Chinese houses, see: File:霧峰林家宮保第第一進門廳.jpg
- Taiwanese folk religion, see: File:P 20160203 083824.jpg
- As you can see the files(or I should say: "the pictures") are just examples. That's what I see in these pictures, so I can hardly judge what should or should not be deleted.--Kai3952 (talk) 11:12, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: I don't mean that. I mean that I have exemplified the buildings are not used for artistic purposes, but their appearance has an artistic design. If you don't understand what I say, please look at the picture below:
- @Kai3952: Art and buildings in Taiwan are treated identically by the "Copyright Act" (1992-2016-present) Article 58: commercial use is not allowed. If this was mistranslated at this government website from the Chinese original, please let me know. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 07:54, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: I know what you say but this is difficult to do. Because the "art" is ubiquitous, it often happens that they think it should not be deleted and we have deleted it. If I do what you say, it is very easy to cause controversy. The consequence is that I was treated as a vandalism by them. For example: the Chinese temples, the aesthetic bridges, the wall decorated with colorful graffiti, the train stations with a sense of design.....have long been integrated into public buildings, so we can hardly judge it is art or not. When I said "they" and "them", I meant the uploaders from Taiwan or the edit users from Chinese Wikipedia.--Kai3952 (talk) 17:42, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Kai3952: Not upload such works. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:29, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: It seems that Wikimedia.Commons has a very broad definition of "Art". Almost 99% of photos takeing public art works are not allowed to be uploaded. So what should I do?--Kai3952 (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Kai3952: The image on the framed wood paneling, depicting hikers / climbers ascending a snow-covered mountain, is art. It is not covered by COM:FOP#Taiwan. Therefore, it is probably copyrighted (barring a license from the artist), newish (wood art doesn't survive long outside, and we have no evidence it's out of copyright), and therefore not allowed here. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:19, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
- I did ask the question on another discussion page. See: "Why File:Tunyuan Trailhead.jpg be submitted to COM:DR because there is No FOP for artistic works in Taiwan?"--Kai3952 (talk) 08:30, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 00:17, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
- Restored: {{FoP-Taiwan}} Yann (talk) 14:37, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
See this Village Pump/Copyright discussion. Latest correspondences from Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) reaffirmed that the non-commercial restriction for Taiwanese non-architecture extends to photographic reproductions like these. Since this photo shows the artwork intentionally, this cannot benefit from Taiwanese de minimis (in which the artwork must be incidental or at background). Correspondences in Chinese: [1] and [2]. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:52, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 02:33, 18 January 2023 (UTC)