56:) does not allow their images to be used for commercial purposes. Check the source and then check the license provided on Knowledge (XXG). The license on Knowledge (XXG) cannot be verified, there is something fishy about it and it caught my attention. You reported me to Administrators? Why? Did I do something wrong? Why did you revert my edits without first checking my claim? Seems to me like your upto to something.--
234:
no, administrators can be anyone online. I don't have to trust administrators if I don't want to. Your trying to force me to trust you because you say you're an administrator. I want to hear what others have to say about this, not what you have to say, you can prepare your argument to those people. You don't know who I am, what if I am the owner of
Bollywoodblog? How would you know if I am or not?--
82:. All photographs used by this site are exclusively created by their own photographers based in Mumbai. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify these images, providing the site is attributed and a direct link running to the source on their site is provided. Correspondence to this effect is archived on Wikimedia's
233:
from the tone of your writings, you sound like you are trying to threaten me. I have the rights to investigate the template you made. This template or license is the only kind I cam across, in which you claim the company gave you permission to use their images. I'm having hard time believing this and
163:
What do you think you are doing?????? I and several other trusted users and administrators have spoken to the director of
Caledonian publishing where we have a written statement stating use for commerical purposes -this took some time and is verified leglly on the OTRS system . Do you think we are
137:
What are you talking about? I didn't change the tags. I only added the correct tag onto the existing tag. An image may have multiple tags if necessary. I'm sorry but I'm not convinced about what you have presented thus far. I don't see any other such license tags on Wiki as the one applied to the
279:
Fine, but the license tag is going to be deleted eventually, even if someone claimed to be the owner of
Bollywoodblog gave you permission thru an emial. Think logically, anyone can make up these things online and no body trusts things like that. If you really want to use all the images on
104:", not "please change the tags without discussion". I'm going to assume that the OTRS tags are accurate, if you believe differently, please do verify by contacting someone. Don't change the tags again, thanks.
261:
I didn;t say I was an administrator - I have turned this down countless times as I prefer to contribute more to article content. I practically function as an admin but I don;t have the admin tools
280:
Bollywoodblog, you have to make them change their license on their web page. Other than that I don't care much about this, but I'm sure many people will try to investigate the license tag.--
290:
Yes indeed there is much online distrust. But I believe in this case it is genuine. I don't know why the tag would be deleted if administrators validated it and secured the coding.
181:
Devendra director of
Caledonian publishing which owns the copywright of all images on the site (except film posters and screenshots of from films of course) confirmed it many times
215:
By email it was confirmed that the site realises that by allowing wikipedia to use the images under 3.0 they are automatically giving consent for commerical use and distribution
142:, and who allowed non-commercial images from Bollywoodblog.com? Who gave permission for their images to be used here in Wiki? Seems to me like you are only here to support
244:
Because the owner of
Bollywood blog was only too willing to help wikipedia and doesn't have the hang ups that you have. Fine I'll give you the email address
324:
If you do your research on
Caledonian Publishing you'll see the company is worth at least a $ 100 million and is not a company that would mess about
39:. I have reverted this. If there are good reasons why these images cannot be used on Knowledge (XXG), please leave a note here.
88:
147:
139:
93:
53:
325:
308:
291:
262:
245:
216:
199:
182:
165:
125:
108:
71:
43:
25:
281:
235:
151:
57:
122:
105:
40:
67:
198:
Your're gonna have to learn that adminstrators are trusted on wikipedia for a reason
78:
This image is owned by
Caledonian Publishing Limited which operates the website
143:
336:
319:
302:
284:
273:
256:
238:
227:
210:
193:
176:
154:
128:
111:
60:
46:
117:
To save you the trouble, I contacted someone with OTRS access, and
83:
146:(the person who added the suspicious tags to all the images in
79:
307:
I'm wondering why it has sparked so much attention with you?
118:
36:
32:
102:
please contact a person with an account on the system
66:
The images you tagged all have links to
Wikimedia's
8:
94:a person with an account on the system
7:
70:system. For example, the license on
148:Category:Images from Bollywood Blog
140:Category:Images from Bollywood Blog
14:
92:. To verify this, please contact
155:23:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
129:20:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
112:13:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
61:12:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
47:11:41, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
1:
80:http://www.bollywoodblog.com
337:11:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
320:11:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
303:10:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
285:10:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
274:10:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
257:10:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
239:10:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
228:11:59, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
211:11:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
194:11:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
177:11:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
31:tag to many images such as
352:
72:Image:Aishwarya Rai.jpg
98:
76:
121:is what they said.
21:You have added the
54:Bollywoodblog.com
343:
334:
333:
317:
316:
300:
299:
271:
270:
254:
253:
225:
224:
208:
207:
191:
190:
174:
173:
30:
24:
351:
350:
346:
345:
344:
342:
341:
340:
330:♦ Sir Blofeld ♦
327:
326:
313:♦ Sir Blofeld ♦
310:
309:
296:♦ Sir Blofeld ♦
293:
292:
267:♦ Sir Blofeld ♦
264:
263:
250:♦ Sir Blofeld ♦
247:
246:
221:♦ Sir Blofeld ♦
218:
217:
204:♦ Sir Blofeld ♦
201:
200:
187:♦ Sir Blofeld ♦
184:
183:
170:♦ Sir Blofeld ♦
167:
166:
28:
22:
19:
17:Image Licensing
12:
11:
5:
349:
347:
288:
287:
242:
241:
162:
160:
159:
158:
157:
132:
131:
123:Angus McLellan
106:Angus McLellan
64:
63:
41:Angus McLellan
18:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
348:
339:
338:
335:
332:
331:
322:
321:
318:
315:
314:
305:
304:
301:
298:
297:
286:
283:
278:
277:
276:
275:
272:
269:
268:
259:
258:
255:
252:
251:
240:
237:
232:
231:
230:
229:
226:
223:
222:
213:
212:
209:
206:
205:
196:
195:
192:
189:
188:
179:
178:
175:
172:
171:
156:
153:
149:
145:
141:
136:
135:
134:
133:
130:
127:
124:
120:
116:
115:
114:
113:
110:
107:
103:
97:
95:
91:
90:
85:
81:
75:
73:
69:
62:
59:
55:
51:
50:
49:
48:
45:
42:
38:
34:
27:
16:
329:
328:
323:
312:
311:
306:
295:
294:
289:
266:
265:
260:
249:
248:
243:
220:
219:
214:
203:
202:
197:
186:
185:
180:
169:
168:
161:
101:
99:
87:
77:
65:
52:The source (
26:cc-by-nc-2.0
20:
282:Hindu-Boar
236:Hindu-Boar
152:Hindu-Boar
144:User:Riana
138:images in
58:Hindu-Boar
164:stupid?
100:Note: "
86:system
126:(Talk)
109:(Talk)
44:(Talk)
74:says:
119:here
89:here
84:OTRS
68:OTRS
37:here
35:and
33:here
150:.--
29:}}
23:{{
96:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.