File talk:Roz young 1991.jpeg

Permission
Author: Michael Wilson Date: July 10, 1991 Publisher: Ohio Magazine

Michael Wilson website

Mrs. Young died in 2005

Other places the photo has appeared online with Mr. Wilson's permission: https://www.facebook.com/129402137124623/photos/a.232742060123963/1716913495040138/?type=3&theater and http://www.daytonhistorybooks.com/page/page/5868426.htm

I have contacted Mr. Wilson and he has given permission for using the photo in Mrs. Young's article. valereee (talk) 11:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . As I explained at User talk:Valereee, Wikipedia policy generally does allow non-free images (i.e., copyright protected images) of deceased individuals to be uploaded and used for primary identification purposes per item 10 of WP:NFCI, but only on the condition that a freely licensed equivalent image is unable to be found or created to serve the same encyclopedic purpose. It doesn't have to be a free equivalent of this same exact image, but only a freely licensed equivalent which allows primary identification. Since you've mentioned above (btw, I moved your post from the file's page to this talk page since there is where such posts belong) that you've been in contact with Michael Wilson who took the photo, I'm wondering if you could ask him if he would mind releasing the file (or a version of the file) under a free license that Wikipedia can accept per WP:COPY. He would need to agree to release his file under a license (typically a Creative Commons license) that allows unrestricted commercial and derivative use. He could choose a license that reqjuires he'd be properly attributed each time the file is downloaded and use by someone, but that's about it. More specifics can be found in WP:CONSENT or WP:DONATEIMAGE, but basically he would be allowing anyone anywhere in the world to download the file at anytime and use for any purpose, and that license would be non-revocable.Wikipedia doesn't really require his permission to upload and use the file as non-free content; his permission only matters if the file is released under a free license. Moreover, giving "for use on Wikipedia only" or "for use by Valeree only" is too restrictive for Wikipedia's free licensing policy, so the file will need to be treated a non-free content in such cases. Now, it's completely understandable if he decides releasing the file under a free license is not in his best interests, but it's something that probably should be confirmed one way or another. The file can mostly be used as non-free content, but this policy is quite restrictive which means the way the file can be used in quite limited. A freely licensed file is much more easier to use and can be added to pages like Template:Did you know nominations/Roz Young or even in other articles where Mrs. Young might be mentioned. Moreover, as I posted above, a non-free image of a deceased person is generally only allowed when there's no free equivalent to serve the same encyclopedic purpose; so, if a free equivalent image is subsequently found, this non-free one will be deleted per WP:F7 as replaceable non-free use. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:46, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, ! Yes, I knew we didn't need his permission; I just thought it was polite to ask if he had any objection since I was able to track him down. I am not aware of any free images of Roz Young, but of course that would be better if one can be found! I kind of hated to ask a working freelance photographer to release all rights to a work product. If a free image is found, I'd approach to ask for sure, maybe he'll enjoy having his work seen by others! Sorry about the DYK, I knew from the kinda scary  upload process that uploading it as non-free meant it could be used on Wikipedia pages only, hadn't realized there were further restrictions on to using it in templates etc. Thanks for your help and of course for your work at DYK! valereee (talk) 09:43, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Ugh! valereee (talk) 09:44, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify one thing in case I made things more confusing. Releasing an image under a free license is not a transfer of copyright; Wilson would still hold the copyright over his work. What he would be doing is releasing a version of it (he can release a lower quality version if he wants) under a free license of his choosing (but acceptable to Wikipedia) for other to use. People would only be able to use the file per the terms of the license, and only be able to use that particular file. At least that is my understanding of how things would work. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:07, 14 November 2018 (UTC)