Commons:Deletion requests/File:EF2 tornado near Wrights, IL.jpg

Welcome, Wikipedians! This deletion discussion is generating interest on Wikipedia. If you are a Wikipedian without much experience of Commons, your input here is welcome, but please be aware of Commons' policies, particularly deletion policy and project scope (criteria for inclusion). Note also that, like Wikipedia deletion discussions, Commons deletion discussions are not decided by voting. You may find Commons:For Wikipedians helpful as an introduction to Commons.

This file was initially tagged by Red-tailed hawk as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Taken from National Weather Service's website, but the image was produced by Tom Stolze and was taken with permission from his facebook. This is not a work of the U.S. Federal Government, so it is not in the public domain, and this is not own work. Does {{PD-NWS}} apply? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:50, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete With respect to that template, which says as stated at https://www.weather.gov/lmk/photo_submission_information: the linked page no longer exists and cannot be presumed to apply to recent uploads or to uploads made not using that form. That linked page is relevant only to the Louisville, Kentucky office (note the url and the structure of the NWS website more generally). It's unclear to me when it exactly stopped existing (the last archive.org pull of that page without it being dead is from a week before this tornado occurred). Other NWS offices are granted only permission to use the photo, so I don't think that the portion of the template about external photos being hosted is actually all that sound for anything that was submitted to another office. Also, the photo explicitly notes that the photo was taken via Facebook (some NWS offices allow direct social media submission of storm photos), and the relevant NWS office is that of St. Louis, Missouri, so I don't presume the copyright holder actually had to use the form cited in the (out-of-date-at-best) template to submit the photograph.

The current terms of use say that The information on National Weather Service (NWS) Web pages are in the public domain, unless specifically noted otherwise. Alas, this photo has an explicit copyright notice on it; it would appear that this means that it is not actually presumed in the public domain on the basis of the ToS statement. As such, we have no reasonable basis to assume that this photograph is in the public domain, and the photograph should be deleted per COM:PRP. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 07:22, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

•  Keep Very confused on what Red-tailed hawk & King of Hearts are talking about. Per NWS policy, every image on a weather.gov page is released into public domain UNLESS explicitly stated it isn’t. In this case, the image does NOT say it is not public domain. Therefore, this is a public domain image on a NWS page. Deleting this should require a larger discussion than a simple deletion discussion. Deletion of this would mean over 1,000 images on weather.gov pages would be eligible for deletion, which basically nullifies {{PD-NWS}}. I encourage the deletion nominator to withdraw the deletion nomination and open a larger discussion. Elijahandskip (talk) 18:05, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Where is this 'NWS policy' that states NWS-hosted but not NWS-created images are public domain unless stated otherwise? All @Red-tailed hawk seems to be pointing out is that the PD-NWS template appears to have been (A) the going practice for only one Weather Forecast office of many and (B) deprecated now even for that one office. Penitentes (talk) 18:20, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Exactly my point. I will not be withdrawing this. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:24, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  On the National Weather Service's main site's disclaimer page I see this:

  "Use of Third-Party Data and Products: Third-party information and imagery are used under license by the individual third-party provider.  This third-party information may contain trade names, trademarks, service marks, logos, domain names, and other distinctive brand features to identify the source of the information. This does not imply an endorsement of the third-party data/products or their provider by NOAA/National Weather Service. Please contact the third-party provider for information on your rights to further use these data/products." Penitentes (talk) 18:37, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The image has a copyright notice. Either a photograph is in the public domain or it is copyrighted; it is plainly obvious that a copyright notice indicates that the file is not in the public domain. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:31, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  And, for what it's worth regarding a larger discussion, I have opened up a thread at VP/C. A larger discussion is needed to correct the existing error in the template. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:46, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Storm chasers generally do that in order to show who the owner is for that image. Legit the exact same thing exists for File:The Storm Prediction Center’s Severe Weather Outlook for March 24, 2023.jpg. SPC created the image, but put their logo on it. If putting logo’s/copyright notices on an image eliminates the public domain function, then again, thousands of images are in violation (not just in weather images). The fact the image itself exists on a weather.gov page indicates it WAS uploaded to the page and/or the government was given specific permission to publish it on their page as a public domain image. Elijahandskip (talk) 18:54, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The image that you are linking to does have a logo on it, but it's also lacking any sort of copyright symbol or other claim of copyright. I'm confused as to why the mere addition of a U.S. government logo in the photo you're referencing is being conflated with a pretty explicit watermark in the source for this photograph that says © Tom Stolze. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:39, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The image is also stored on the NWS Web servers (https://www.weather.gov/images/lsx/TomStolze_FB_IMG_1634004043014.jpg). It doesn’t matter that there is a copyright symbol on it. The US federal government specifically states, “The information on National Weather Service (NWS) Web pages are in the public domain, unless specifically noted otherwise, and may be used without charge for any lawful purpose so long as you do not: 1) claim it is your own (e.g., by claiming copyright for NWS information -- see below), 2) use it in a manner that implies an endorsement or affiliation with NOAA/NWS, or 3) modify its content and then present it as official government material. You also cannot present information of your own in a way that makes it appear to be official government information.” (Noting I bolded and italicized part of the statement which is not bolded in the quote). The exact caption on the NWS webpage is “ Photo of the tornado as it began to touch down near Wrights, IL. Credit: Tom Stolze (via Facebook)”. It does not specifically say the image is not public domain. According to that disclaimed notice, the image must be a public domain image to be on their web servers & the web page does not specifically state anything about it not being public domain. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:49, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  That copyright symbol is a very explicit indicator that the image is copyrighted (i.e. not in the public domain). I don't know what else there is to say or do here except to allow people besides us to weigh in. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:20, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, in particular due to the "watermark in the source for this photograph that says © Tom Stolze". —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]