Neither the "Wikipedia community " nor the "Nigerian community" is to decide whether they merit a Wikipedia page or not. One does not become a subject of a Wikipedia article by creating a video for WMF. If they had been the subject of multiple independent reliable sources, someone with no conflict of interest will probably write about them and this has nothing to do with the Wikipedia community or the Nigerian community. 

This is a commissioned work and accordingly to Nigerian copyright law, the copyright of the work does not belong to the WMF but the creator of the work. Unless there is a contract agreement between Mark Angels and the WMF to release the work under a free license, I doubt they will change the license. I'll like to hear from Zack if such agreement exist. 

Regards, 

Isaac

On Oct 2, 2017 5:59 PM, "Florence Devouard" <anthere@anthere.org> wrote:


Le 02/10/2017 à 18:52, Isla Haddow Flood a écrit :
Hey Zack,

Thanks for the clarity … that completely makes sense - I don’t think that anyone has a problem with them being paid to do an excellent job (at least, I don’t) - I was just wondering about the licensing on their release of the video. Perhaps you could ask them to change it, unless it is not what they agreed to? And if they are claiming the video, they should mention that they were commissioned by the Wikimedia Foundation or whoever to do it. That would tick all the attribution boxes, and keep with the licensing, yes?

With regards to whether that makes them notable enough to have a Wikipedia article, then that is for the Nigerian community to decide. But it should be because they are notable in their own right, and not because they did a Wikipedia video.

One correction. It is not for the Nigerian community to decide. It is for the Wikipedia community to do so.

Florence



_______________________________________________
African-Wikimedians mailing list
African-Wikimedians@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/african-wikimedians