Commons:Categories for discussion/2022/12/Category:Art works by User:Savonarolaola
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Category:Art works by User:Savonarolaola[edit]
This seems like a bizarre category. Either this is artwork by a living artist uploaded here without evidence of permission or it is just spam art work uploaded by a user here. We should not be categorizing uploads by users with guesses as to their identity. If this is the artist, then the category should be renamed to Art work by the artist. Ricky81682 (talk) 10:45, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- For now, the works are declared here as a artwork by the living artist with his permission, which published them under his Commons nickname User:Savonarolaola. The fact that the author granted his license and the fact the he published his works under his Wikimedia nickname don't imply automatically that his works are "spam art works". It is usual for many artists that their artistic identity is represented by a pseudonym or nickname, not by a civil name. In general, many users upload their works here under a nickname, without us knowing their real names. Grouping works by the same author into one category is a practical matter of content organization - regardless of how the identity of the author is described. --ŠJů (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- @ŠJů How are they "declared" the artist's work? Opinion? If they are the artist's work, the category should be renamed to Category:Art works by Šimon Brejcha. If they aren't, it should be deleted as we don't do Category:Art works by Wikimedians. Either way, someone editing an artist's page without disclosing a conflict of interest and then uploading their works under a GFDL license is a ridiculous way to ignore all other sensible policies. We don't accept people who edit an article about a television show and then upload screenshots and guess that they are the rightful license holder so we don't bother them or something. It may be an agent or someone else who is just a fan who has no right to just take the artist's license and change it. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:03, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Ricky81682: The uploader User:Savonarolaola declared the images as his own works and there is no reason to cast doubt upon these his claim. The fact that we do not know his civilian identity reduces the value and usefulness of his contribution, but is not in itself ground for deletion, nor against categorization of the images. The question of whether such pseudonymous artworks are within the project does not directly depend on whether we know the civil name of the artist, nor on whether the artist himself was the uploader. We have no evidence that User:Savonarolaola is identical with Šimon Brejcha. It's possible, but not likely, since none of those images is used in the article about Šimon Brejcha. However, it is likely that there is some relationship between the two persons. In general, if we have some images with uncertain localization or identification, the upload context (previous and following uploads of the same uploader) can help to better identify or at least estimate what the images can be, but such indications cannot be taken as assertions. But they can help direct others in their search, or at least suggest a larger context. --ŠJů (talk) 19:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- You keep repeating that the uploader "declared the images as his own works" here now but when you created this category in May 2021 you stated "nowhere is it declared"? Where was this declared? This is not Banksy or some pseudoanonymous artist. This is an actual living artist with actual artwork who may have zero idea what is going on here and has his work being reused with derivative works made. Again, I don't understand why you care that this uploader may or may not be the artist. If it is the artist, then fine, the artist can post whatever the hell they want to release into whatever license they want. Should the category be renamed to the artist then? Ricky81682 (talk) 10:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Ricky81682: The uploader User:Savonarolaola declared the images as his own works and there is no reason to cast doubt upon these his claim. The fact that we do not know his civilian identity reduces the value and usefulness of his contribution, but is not in itself ground for deletion, nor against categorization of the images. The question of whether such pseudonymous artworks are within the project does not directly depend on whether we know the civil name of the artist, nor on whether the artist himself was the uploader. We have no evidence that User:Savonarolaola is identical with Šimon Brejcha. It's possible, but not likely, since none of those images is used in the article about Šimon Brejcha. However, it is likely that there is some relationship between the two persons. In general, if we have some images with uncertain localization or identification, the upload context (previous and following uploads of the same uploader) can help to better identify or at least estimate what the images can be, but such indications cannot be taken as assertions. But they can help direct others in their search, or at least suggest a larger context. --ŠJů (talk) 19:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Update Since asking for permission on each of the images here, the images have all been deleted and the category is now empty. I think the category can be deleted as an empty category and this discussion closed as moot. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Conclusion: Per @Ricky81682's comment above, speedy delete category since it's now empty. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 16:27, 16 August 2023 (UTC)