Talk:Megacephalosaurus

Holotype photo
Hi, nice job with the article, I just noticed I have no idea what the original source of the photo of the holotype skull is that I uploaded here back in 2008 before I had a very good grasp at copyright laws, and the credit to Williston is of course bogus, as he died in 1918. So I'm afraid the photo has to be nominated for deletion, unless you know another old source it is used in that may be public domain? FunkMonk (talk) 13:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The Oceans of Kansas website appears to be the original source of any version of that photo in the internet, which indicates that the original photo could possibly be in the possession of the Sternberg Museum. I'm not exactly sure how you got to the conclusion that the photo is dated 1952; based on my research it could have been taken any time between its first mounting in 1950 or 1951 and until black-and-white photography became obsolete. If we can identify who took those photos and what the person did with it, it is possible that it could be considered public domain on the grounds of no copyright renewal. The best case here would be to try reaching out to Mike Everhart or another curator at the Sternberg Museum.


 * There are a couple of other historical photos including its excavation and its exhibit debut which can be found in Schumacher et al. (2013) that are dated 1950 and 1951 respectively, but it seems that the paper represents the first-ever time those photos were uploaded on the internet. Moreover, its also possible that T&F may have taken a copyright of the photos for themselves as they published the paper that has the photos in it. Again, we could contact one of the authors (Everhart, Schumacher, Carpenter) regarding details of the photo and possibly consider it public domain on the same grounds.


 * I have been unable to find any free alternatives. The closest I have found was a really good photo of the holotype skull as extracted from the mount, but it is licensed as a Non-Commercial CC 4.0 so we can't use it as a free image. But if it's possible, we could try declaring non-free use for that image. Alternatively, Triebold Paleontology has a photo of a cast of the holotype skull. Assuming that is a representative of the company, we could ask if the user can release the photo under a CC license. Macrophyseter &#124;  talk  20:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That page also looked quite different back when I uploaded the image, with different identities for the specimens, so I was probably confused. I just tried to make up for it by adding some PD images to the Brachauchenius page (where that photo was originally added to), but I saw now that you've already uploaded recent photos of the specimens... Maybe they are ok for historical purposes. I think I'll have to request deletion of the current taxobox image here, unfortunately... FunkMonk (talk) 07:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Damn, the very moment I pressed the submit button for an edit to the Brachauchenius article with my new uploads I got an edit conflict with your edit that added older drawings of the exact same specimens in the exact same formats I intended, what an intriguing coincidence. I have already replaced the images by the time I saw your response on this talk page, and I feel about "undoing" your efforts the very moment you made them. However, your uploads can still be of use as historical images for a future research history section that can be made in that article. In fact, Brachauchenius is in my bucket list of what to do next, although I have exams next Monday and may not be able to draft anything until they are finished.


 * Back on the main topic, I can't find any contacts for Mike Everhart or Carpenter, but I found an email attributed to Bruce Schumacher and a paleoart search shows me that he has been active in advising paleoartists in their restorations. I could try contacting him for information on the photo and/or if he may be able to CC-release other photos of the holotype instead if I have the time. Macrophyseter &#124; talk  08:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Haha, weird, and I wonder why I didn't find and upload those images years ago anyway... I have DRed the holotype skull image, and well, fingers crossed for getting a new one. If we can't get it, there probably will be a photo published in a free journal down the line. The reconstructed skull could be used instead for now. FunkMonk (talk) 09:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, I think you could throw in one of the new Brachauchenius images here for comparison. And if you go for FAC, you could request a life restoration and size comparison of Megacephalosaurus at WP:paleoart. FunkMonk (talk) 09:29, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I have sent an email to Dr. Bruce A. Schumacher (lead author of Schumacher et al., 2013) asking about the copyright status of two images taken during the early 1950s (a photo of the holotype's excavation and a photo of its first mounting). Apparently the only email pertaining to him that I could find was his federal service email, which means that it is possible that he may not respond if the Forest Service Agency has suspended work due to the coronavirus. I haven't found a conclusive email to Mike Everhart, but there is a possible email address on his Oceans of Kansas website ("mike at oceansofkansas.com"). I've sent an email to that address regarding the status of the DRed imaged, but there may be no response since it may either be nonexistent or no longer maintained.


 * I personally think that throwing in pictures of the Brachauchenius fossils would be a bad idea if we can't pair them with images of FHSM VP-321, as it would just make the focus more confusing. If things go to the worst, we may have to try having a non-free rationale if possible. Macrophyseter &#124; talk  20:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Interesting, I'd think the opposite, because subtle differences that distinguish closely related taxa wouldn't really be visible in life restorations, only in fossils, so they would be even easier to confuse for the same taxon. Anyway, whoever writes decides! FunkMonk (talk) 20:36, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I've recieved replies from both contacts. Everhart explained a bit on the copyright details of your old upload, stating that the photograph was likely taken during the 1950s by George F. Sternberg but the copyright was likely transferred to Fort Hays State University upon his passing in 1969. Regardless of who took it, Everhart stated that the original photo in the collections of the Sternberg Museum. The photo appeared on the Oceans of Kansas website by explicit permission by the University, indicating that they have copyright ownership of it. Schumacher told me that the Sternberg Museum also holds the two other images I talked about earlier and that he and his colleagues were able to put them in the paper by explicit permission by the Museum. HOWEVER, Everhart also offered to supply an old photo of FHSM VP-321 he took himself. I've sent him the process on OTRS, but it will be his decision if he wants to submit it or not.Macrophyseter &#124; talk  23:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That was quick! Yeah, even if it isn't a great quality photo, it's better than nothing. FunkMonk (talk) 23:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:53, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Megacephalosaurus eulerti.jpg