Commons:License review/Requests

Kindly read Commons:License review and relevant pages such as Flickr files before applying for the right.

To become a reviewer, you need to be familiar with the general licensing policy of Commons and the common practices of reviewing. A reviewer is required to know which Creative Commons licenses are compatible with Wikimedia Commons and which are not, and be dedicated to license reviewing every so often and offer their assistance in clearing the backlogs. Relevant knowledge can be demonstrated by regularly participating in deletion requests or in New Files Patrolling.

Post your request below and be prepared to respond to questions. The community may voice their opinions or ask a few questions to verify your knowledge. A few days later (usually 48 hours), a reviewer or an administrator will determine the possible outcome of the request based on the input received from the community. The closing admin/reviewer will grant the right if there are no objections and add the applicant to the list of reviewers. If permissions are granted, you can add {{User reviewer}} (or one of its variants) to your user page and begin reviewing images.

Click the button to submit your request. Alternatively, copy the code below to the bottom of this page, and only replace "Reason" with the reason you are requesting this user right. Requests will be open for a minimum of two days (48 hours).

=={{subst:REVISIONUSER}}==
{{subst:LRR|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|Reason ~~~~}}

Note for Admins/Reviewers: To close a request, please wrap the entire section excluding the section heading with {{Frh}} and {{Frf}}. If the request is successful, please leave this message {{subst:image-reviewerWelcome}}--~~~~ on the applicant's user talk page.

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved\|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 5 days.

Giantflightlessbirds

Latest comment: 2 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Giantflightlessbirds (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · deleted uploads · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (search username in archives) (assign permissions)
Reason: I intend to put myself forward for VRT eventually, but would like to start by contributing to licence review, especially the licensing of iNaturalist images. I'm an experienced Commons user with around 10,000 uploads and have a good understanding of New Zealand copyright law at least, and have run several workshops and webinars on copyright for the GLAM sector. I'm active on iNaturalist with about 1500 observations, and have experience negotiating image-licence changes to a Commons-compatible licence with other iNaturalist users for ten years, in my role as coordinator of the Critter of the Week project. I'd like to help with the backlog and get some experience with the issues involved. Many thanks!--Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 03:35, 29 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Scheduled to end: 03:35, 31 January 2026 (UTC) (the earliest)

Comments

Hello Mike, thank you for your application! I'd like to do a bit of "interviewing", as that may help some interested people in voicing their opinion about granting you the LR rights. Your application content lead me to ask this:

1) Imagine yourself talking of a photographers meetup or some nature-related fair with an individual active in photographing nature, Wikipedia gets mentioned. That individual has only a basic understanding of the movement's licensing principles, but seems inclined to offer some imagery ("For Wikipedia? I'll give you some images, of course!"). We do have some knowledge resources around, please tell us which points you would make to inform that individual about needed prerequisites for hosting their works on Commons and link relevant info pages (Commons or Wikipedia).

2) License reviewing often involves relying upon technical clues to gauge a possible authorship. Imagine yourself encountering an image sourced from some random photo-sharing site like Flickr, apparently licensed with a suitable CC-by-SA version. The image's author has other uploads on his account. What would be markers you're looking for to check for the validity of the given license? Please name at least 4 or 5 items.

Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 12:21, 30 January 2026 (UTC)Reply