User talk:Svavar Kjarrval

PUF 2014 August 27: "File: Icelandic police star (logo).jpg"
Hi Svavar Kjarrval,

It appears that on the copyright status of File:Icelandic police star (logo).jpg at WP:PUF has been closed. What is the next step, if any, that should be taken in your opinion? I think that if an appropriate free use rationale cannot be provided, then the file should be nominated for deletion, but that is just my opinion. For reference, both my user page and user talk page were vandalized as a direct result of this PUF discussion, so I'm not sure how to best proceed regarding this particular file without creating further drama. - Marchjuly (talk) 00:03, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Marchjuly. Under the circumstances, I think a nomination for deletion is appropriate since we don't have any free use rationale which fulfills the conditions which must be upheld in such cases. An alternative would be to put the nomination on hold, pending an answer to a FOI request where you would request a copy of the image in the discussed regulation including a request for information about its copyright status for re-use purposes. -Svavar Kjarrval (talk) 14:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply Svavar Kjarral. I am not familiar with FOIs, but if that is viable option to deletion, then it might be something worth pursuing. However, I believe that is something that should be done by the file's uploader per WP:BURDEN, right? As it as, the uploader seems to have taken the PUF discussion about the file somewhat personally; Therefore, I am not sure how open they might be to filing such a request. The uploader is, after all, the only one who really knows the file's source and copyright information, right? Can another editor add rationale and this information if the uploader fails or refuses to do so?
 * Other files using the same "public domain" rationale have also been uploaded by the same editor, so these will probably have to be dealt with as well in the same way as this particular file. Do you think this should be further discussed at the WP:NFCR or should it go straight to WP:FFD?- Marchjuly (talk) 01:10, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree that the file uploader is the one with the burden in that case, per the rules. The source is unknown so there is a case for file deletion request. If such a case is put forth, the uploader would need to provide the information if it has not been provided already. Failing or refusing to do so would result in a file deletion, I would guess.
 * It is neither our responsibility to provide a proper version nor to seek any evidence to support its continued availability on Wikipedia. If the uploader cannot provide a proper source, that version is still subject to a deletion, even if we provide a version with a proper licence. FOI requests would only serve to provide a properly licenced version (if successful) but wouldn't justify the unsourced version. However, the file uploader in question might be more open to delete his/her version if a proper one is provided in its place.
 * We should first deal with a single file deletion request before submitting more. If the request is approved, the uploader should be given a chance to fix the other uploads (delete or provide information). Otherwise it will be seen as a personal attack. -Svavar Kjarrval (talk) 01:29, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree 100%. I will be away for a few days, so I will probably not be online much. If you feel filing a FFD request is the only real option left on the table, then I have no objection to doing so. I just want to follow proper procedures. - Marchjuly (talk) 02:01, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Since I really doubt the government of Iceland is going to file a takedown request very soon, the FFD request can wait until you return. Please file it at your own convenience. -Svavar Kjarrval (talk) 22:41, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Svavar Kjarrval. I have posted a request for clarification of the file's "non-free" status at. Please feel free to add any comments you may have. Thanks in advance. - Marchjuly (talk) 05:46, 7 October 2014 (UTC) Thank you for posting the request. Don't have anything to add to the discussion at the moment. Too bad I can't put only that section on my watchlist. -Svavar Kjarrval (talk) 14:29, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem. It looks like the image can be used as a "non-free logo", which is fine with me. I'm not really into deleting things that can be saved. However, if you feel differently, then please do discuss before the thread is closed. That way at least all sides get a chance to say give their opinions. - Marchjuly (talk) 14:46, 12 October 2014 (UTC)