User talk:Timhudsonchs

Cheadle Hulme School
Hi Tim, thanks for your message, I've responded on my talk page, just letting you know here as a courtesy. TomPhil 19:45, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cheadle Hulme School Crest.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Cheadle Hulme School Crest.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:37, 15 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I may be getting picky and I have not followed any previous serpentine discussions, but the ones I have seen here are full of confusion


 * WP commons will not host copyrighted images.
 * WP commons will not host company logos
 * What you have here is a full coat of arms- that has been adopted by a company to form its corporate logo, which does hold a copyright. To argue that the the corporate logo can be used would only apply, if the owner released the logo. To argue that the full coat of arms should be used would not involve copyright!
 * Heraldically- the crest is part of the full coat of arms and its incorrectly used in the marketing document, A lot of the discussion is imprecisely using specific terms- and getting very confused, The blazon is the text description of the coat of arms issued to the governors by the College of Arms and as such is a fact-that can be used, The governors employ a graphic artist to render that blazon- and then the artist and or the governors hold copyright over the artistic rendering. The copyright holder can release that rendering under several licenses
 * If you as a employee of the governors have the authority to release the particular rendering of the blazon of the coat of arms, used by the schools as its logo- then you should '. This jpeg image could be released as CC-BY-SA 4,0 The corporate manual of style is written in management speak- and this tends to confuse and incorrectly uses technical terms; it does not state the copyright of the rendering
 * If the image is not accepted by commons it still could be released here under Fair Use but that reqires a bit of form filling
 * Until Wikipedia develops its own house style for rendering Coats of Arms- my POV is that we should go for the best 'released' rendering of the blazon --ClemRutter (talk) 13:24, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks  I have already, in the past, uploaded the corporate logo here, for use on the Cheadle Hulme School page.  As you can see, this file has now been orphaned as it was removed from that page.  The reason this conversation has started is because someone removed the logo and replaced it with an artist's impression of the coat of arms.  My argument is that this coat of arms is not an accurate representation of the School's coat of arms and, therefore, it would be more representative to replace the School's logo, as was.  The issue of copyright came in to the conversation because originally the uploader had amended the logo without permission.  Now they have uploaded this interpretation which, I believe, is not accurate and therefore is unencyclopaedic.
 * In terms of the logo being uploaded, it states on the WikiSchools Project guidelines to include "The school's crest, logo, seal, emblem and/or coat of arms," so this is why I think it is fine to use the corporate logo, with permission from myself.Timhudsonchs (talk) 13:57, 20 June 2016 (UTC)