Commons talk:License review

Photo of photo

I was going to review File:'The Overland' train in 1949 (27318298350).jpg but this is clearly a photo of a photo - is there a standard operating procedure? Can we also stop future commons users from uploading this particular photo? The Flickr user has 22,000 photos and 99% are fine; most hobby photographers see no issue with uploading such content. mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 15:26, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mr.choppers: I tagged it with {{subst:dw-nsd}}.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 00:45, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Is this a common enough occurrence that it ought to be mentioned at the project page? I see it quite frequently. mr.choppers (talk)^-en- 00:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mr.choppers: Yes.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 00:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Reviewers cannot review their own uploads

Hi,

I would like a clarification on reviewers cannot review their own uploads. I found File:Silvercloudship.jpg on the English Wikipedia and verified the licensing was legitimate, and transferred the file to Commons. Am I allowed to add a passed license review to this file? In other words, is this considered my own upload? -- Whpq (talk) 13:47, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, your "own upload" is defined as you uploading a file that doesn't exist on Wikimedia Commons or any local Wikipedia. In this case, it isn't considered to be an "own upload" as you've imported the file. The upload log of the file will be imported together with the action. (See commons log, en.wp log. TLDR, imports shouldn't be considered to be your own upload unless the initial upload was done by you. And since the mentioned file is from Flickr, a bot will do the license checking so any action from a human is not needed. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 14:33, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

That's what I thought. As for leaving it to a bot, I figured since I already reviewed the image on enwiki before the file transfer, I might as well mark it as reviewed. -- Whpq (talk) 14:36, 22 May 2024 (UTC)