Per implied request by anonymous user 81.76.73.250, I'll explain further my edit of February 23, and again today. Okiefromokla questions? 20:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC) Feature article candidates often have problems with picture licensing. Pictures are really a tricky thing if they're not taken personally and released to public domain by the photographer. No one would probably care about it being on History of Tulsa, Oklahoma, but featured articles must set a higher standard for viewing around the world. There were pictures with the "published before 1923" license when this article became a featured candidate, but reviewers wanted them removed since the tag only necessarily applies to the United States, possibly excluding its legal status in other countries.
If the current license is correct, we cannot use it. I'm not sure of the copyright status of the pictures from the Tulsa Historical Society, but we could email and ask them. Hi, does anyone think that this photo of early Tulsa should be added or replace another photo? Mabye in the history section, there are no old photos of the city and I think a FA should have at least one.- CPacker ( talk) 19:29, 23 February 2008 (UTC) It would be nice, but we shouldn't include it due to licensing issues with this particular picture.
0 kommentar(er)
