File talk:General Qamar Javed Bajwa.jpg

ISPR has granted CC by SA rights to the official photograph of Chief of the Army Staff, General Qamar Javed Bajwa
Dear, according to the permitted licensing terms described in Licensing, any material which has CC-BY-SA rights, which could be any one of the following, is permitted on Wikimedia:-


 * https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0/
 * https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/
 * https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/
 * https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
 * https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Pls have a look on details of the permitted license types listed above and under the Notices you will find the following:-

No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.

I hope this help. --Atagill (talk) 04:32, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi You have stated in your upload that the image has been released under the CC-BY-SA 1.0 license but I do not see any such wording on the website or an OTRS from ISPR which states that this is okay. Additional, there is an issue with this statement "publicity, privacy, or moral rights". A similar issue had come up for photos released under PIB (and related sourced) which releases images publicly but places similar restrictions (in my opinion) on them. Based on a discussion(Undeletion_requests/Archive/2017-01) these images are not allowed. This is the reason I have nominated the image for Copy-right violations. Adamgerber80 (talk) 04:41, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, CC-by-SA is a terminology being used by Creative Commons, if the terms of license are same as described in CC-by-SA 1.0 then it automatically meets the criteria. Also if you look at CC-by-SA 1.0 you will find the wording you have objected.
 * For Undeletion_requests/Archive/2017-01 file, I am unable to see file it self by going to the link so I dont know how it's source described the license.
 * CC-by-SA is not only a terminology used by Creative Commons but it an actual Copy-right license used for sharing images and other content across the world. CC rules specify that the owner of the content should clearly state the content is being released under the said license which is not the case here since ISPR website does not explicitly state this. It mentions that the image is used for public use but should meet the privacy and morality requirements which is not acceptable under CC aka CC-by-SA rules. Please read through the discussion thoroughly and you will see why it was removed. You don't need the image for that. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 05:10, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I have initiated a request on ISPR's Write to Us page. Hopefully they will be responding in 24 hours. So meanwhile keep the pic intact.--Atagill (talk) 05:56, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Since the Disclaimer page on ISPR has now been updated and clearly states CC BY SA, so I have closed the deletion nomination on Commons and this photograph is going to stay here. By the way, I was hoping to get the photo in a bit bigger resolution. --Saqib (talk) 15:18, 4 December 2017 (UTC)