On 12/11/11 15:11, William Allen Simpson wrote:
There are a number of obvious technical issues.
YouTube and others
have had to handle this, it's time for us.
1) DMCA doesn't require a takedown until there's been a complaint. We
really shouldn't allow deletion until there's been an actual complaint.
We need technical means for recording official notices and appeals.
Informal opinions of ill-informed volunteers aren't helpful.
We have higher standards than that.
2) Fast scripting and insufficient notice lead to
flapping of images,
and confusion by the owners of the documents (and the editors of
articles, as 2 days is much *much* too short for most of us). We need
something to enforce review times.
Yes, deleting on 2 days was too fast, given that you had concerns over
it. That's also the reason it was restored by Odder :)
3) Folks in other industries aren't monitoring
Talk pages and have no
idea or sufficient notice that their photos are being deleted. The
Talk mechanism is really not a good method for anybody other than very
active wikipedians. We need better email and other social notices.
See my other reply about email notification.
4) We really don't have a method to
"prove" that a username is actually
under control of the public figure. Hard to do. Needs discussion.
We have OTRS
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:OTRS
5) We probably could use some kind of comparison
utility to help
confirm/deny a photo or article is derived from another source.
If there's a better place to discuss this, please indicate.
That's not a problem in this case, as the photo /was/ in facebook. The
problem was identifying the prior one.