Someone recently posted an article about how to use Wikipedia to move
up on Google search engine results. I had also read another article
on the same topic on a private list serve.
I have now caught what appears to be a publisher using methods similar
to what we've been reading about, being careful not to use their own
in-house computers, creating multiple accounts and IPs to do the work,
adding multiple outside links to legite and related texts and journals
to one article, then making that article a prime see also for related
articles.
Very clever, very well done, if only they had had the patience to do
it a little slower, and use someone a little nicer. See my post on
AN/I and follow my links for a little insider's view on how to promote
a product on Wikipedia.
KP
PS In spite of direct and quick access to ISPNs and journal links,
this still could be someone who doesn't work for Elsevier, but really
likes their journals and books enough that they would do this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incide…
As the guy who posted about this on his blog, I wanted to add in some
additional comments...
1) Sorry that I hit everything in the middle of an outage. I've since
edited my blog post to reflect that as it didn't need to be part of
the original record.
2) I'd really appreciate consideration of changing the policy of not
attributing third party photographs where they are displayed. There
are many reasons for this, but primary is that it's an accepted
practice to credit photographs with the photograph itself. As well,
the Creative Commons attribution restriction does state that the
attribution be given in a manner reasonable to the medium and the
means. By crediting in a manner that is accepted and practiced in the
photographic industry, it helps in a small way to let photographers
know if the CC-license their material, it'll be used in a way that
respects their wishes. Placing that data one click away is not
obvious to users and doesn't feel "right" from the perspective of a
copyright holder.
3) EXIF metadata should be preserved, even on resized images.
Thumbnails can be recreated, so junking those isn't an issue. But
stripping unrecoverable information, especially that which may
contain author and license information, is a problem when the images
are borrowed and used downstream. I wish I had a good way to strip
just thumbnails, but I don't currently know of one. Flickr has the
same practice as well, and it's annoying....
I realize that I'm not a part of your community and that I'm
injecting an outside viewpoint. And, as a third party, there's only
so much I can do. But I'm more than happy to discuss these issues if
it is helpful.
James Duncan Davidson
james(a)duncandavidson.com
+1 503 784 8747
http://duncandavidson.com/archives/564
I responded:
"My apologies on behalf of Wikipedia and Wikimedia! I've emailed to
wikien-l and commons-l about this post, asking for suggestions on how
we can do better on this sort of thing. There's an editorial habit on
English Wikipedia of not putting attributions on photos in the
articles themselves, leaving that to the image page ... I think that's
a matter for discussion as well."
I think we have to do better on this, at least in some way. The image
page needs a BIG OBVIOUS CC notice. Many do, but some don't.
- d.
Commons turns 4 on September 7th. I was thinking we could try to have
our own little week-long fundraiser as a way to mark the occasion. But
if there is an official one following it a few weeks later I guess
it's not worth it.
cheers,
Brianna
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sue Gardner <sgardner(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: 22-Aug-2007 23:02
Subject: [Foundation-l] 2007 Fundraising planning begins: request for your help
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Hi folks,
As announced at Wikimania, the Foundation plans to launch our 2007
fundraiser this fall. Currently we're targeting September 23 to
November 22, although those dates may change.
Our goal is to paint a compelling and accessible picture of the work
we do, and why it's important. In doing that, we hope to persuade new
people to support us – those who don't know much about us, but would
be sympathetic if they did.
Here are some areas where we anticipate needing your help:
- We need people to help collect compelling human stories that show
why the projects matter. We know we're making a major impact on real
people's lives, and we want to collect together some of those stories,
and make sure they get told. If you can help with this, please contact
Cary Bass at cbass(a)wikimedia.org, or put your stories here
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communication_Projects_Group/Success_stories….
Please note though we're not necessarily looking for stories about how
the projects have changed *your* life; we want stories that
demonstrate all kinds of impact –e.g., on schools, language groups,
countries, communities of interest, etc.–, not just impact on
individual people.
- We will need translation help. That will happen through the
translation committee – http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translations.
- We will need lots of help designing and implementing the message.
That will happen through the WMF Communications Committee (AKA
ComCom).
- And we will need lots of people to help us plan and carry out the
plans as they're developed. If you can help us with that, please let
Cary know.
Please feel free to distribute this note to anyone who should see it.
Thanks,
Sue
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment:
http://modernthings.org/
The only thing I have found, WP wise, about image captions and crediting is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Captions#Tips_for_describing_pictures. There is no hard or fast rule about it, but I removed cases in the past of people who put themselves in the image captions to demand credit.Regards,
Zachary Harden, Eagle Scout (BSA)
Oceanside, California, United States
-------------------------------------
Flags of the World Editor: BY and MD
Corresponsal/Correspondent - VENEZIMBOL
> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 21:21:08 +0100> From: dgerard(a)gmail.com> To: wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org; commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: [Commons-l] Making damn sure image attribution is very clear> > http://duncandavidson.com/archives/564> > I responded:> > "My apologies on behalf of Wikipedia and Wikimedia! I've emailed to> wikien-l and commons-l about this post, asking for suggestions on how> we can do better on this sort of thing. There's an editorial habit on> English Wikipedia of not putting attributions on photos in the> articles themselves, leaving that to the image page ... I think that's> a matter for discussion as well."> > > I think we have to do better on this, at least in some way. The image> page needs a BIG OBVIOUS CC notice. Many do, but some don't.> > > - d.> > _______________________________________________> Commons-l mailing list> Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
_________________________________________________________________
See what you’re getting into…before you go there
http://newlivehotmail.com/?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_viral_preview_0507
Hum
I'm guessing some section of the population of this list will have a go
at this BUT I do think we need to look at some PR issues. A while back
there was a sharp rap on the knuckles on Meta about deleting images
because it was "better to have them locally as Commons just delete
things without warning". That one I think was pacified in part & I
cannot put my finger on a link.
However...
I have recently spent rather more time on en wp (please don't get me
started, I'm not keen on the place or indeed the interactions that go on
there).
I felt folks should be aware of this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incide….
There are some pretty strong views aired there & I would ask that folks
think before they are tempted to join in (removal of previously licensed
material will get some folks hot under the collar!).
To me this is a wider PR thing. When I was on en wp I knew next to
nothing about commons. On this list recently we were equated with a
"service" to Wikipedia. Elsewhere (I forget again where) I mentioned
that I changed an upload warning template on Meta that suggested
uploading material to en wp. I really do not think that we (our
function & us) are well understood and I think this is worth some
thought.
I'm off to sit quietly somewhere and not go back to my mailbox for a
while!! Just thought people should know.
Me :-)
--
Herby
herbythyme(a)fmail.co.uk
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Faster than the air-speed velocity of an
unladen european swallow
As {{Information}} will be one of the primary sources of image
metadata for years to come, I thought it important to find all images
that I, personally, uploaded to Commons that lack said template.
So I wrote Yet Another Tool. Turns out, over 48% of my images lack
that template! Well, I've been uploading to Commons since forever,
that is, before {{Information}} existed. So much for
rationalization...
But, check yourself! Of Brianna's uploads, less than 9% lack
{{Information}}. Yay!
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/mynoinfo.php?user=Pfctdayelise
Also, she has uploaded exactly 333 files now, and has to buy a round! ;-)
Cheers,
Magnus
Please take a look at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/American_non-acceptance_of_the_rule_of_the_s…
to see how American non-acceptance of the rule of the shorter term of
the Berne Convention is impeding our site developments. The Meta page
says: "Current U.S. copyright laws, under 17 U.S.C. 104(c) and 17
U.S.C. §104A, seem not to accept the rule of the shorter term,
creating confusions for users wishing to post foreign works and
putting burdens on administrators who must verify if a work is in fact
copyrighted in the United States even if it has already been in the
public domain in the country of original publication."
17 U.S.C. §104A makes the restored copyright automatic. Filing with
the USA Copyright Office a notice of intent to enforce that person's
copyright is to show formal intention. If any users can contact
foreign authors or their successors to ask whether they will pursue
USA copyright even if they can no longer copyright their works at
home, please forward the message to permissions at wikimedia dot org,
but if they cannot be easily contacted, the works are orphaned.
British governmental works under Crown Copyright are known not
affected by American non-acceptance of the rule of the shorter term
when British Government does not pursue copyright beyond its home term
abroad.
Regards,
Jusjih as
Administrator in (same username in all of these sites)
1. Chinese Wikipedia
2. Multilingual Wikisource
3. Chinese Wiktionary
4. English Wikisource
5. Chinese Wikisource
6. Wikimedia Commons
7. English Wiktionary
8. English Wikipedia
9. Chinese Wikiquote
10. English Wikiquote
Like this? ;-)
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/catfood.php?category=Flags_of_Costa_Rica
I'm new to RSS feed generation, so please text and tell me if there's
something broken/odd.
Tech info:
This shows the latest 10 images in a category, according to
img_timestamp, not cl_timestamp. So, it really does show the latest
images uploaded into that category, and not the latest added to that
category (though these are often the same!).
Magnus
On 8/20/07, Robin Schwab <contact(a)robinschwab.ch> wrote:
[snip]
> Exif information
> is not altered when uploading. Exif date/time original is not altered
> when edititing in Photoshop.
This brings us back to an old issue as well.. right now EXIF data
isn't copied into thumbnails. This is annoying because our thumbs
lose all this nice data.
It would also be useful if we added 'thumbnailed flag' and a link to
the wikimedia image to the EXIF of thumbs that we generate. This would
make detection of uploading images derived from our thumbnails much
easier.
It would be even better to also copy the entire text of the image
page, but just the URL would be a big improvement.
We don't copy the EXIF today for good reason: some jpegs have huge
blobs of data stuffed into the jpegs. A complete matrix+shaper ICC
profile is much larger than most of our thumbs. There are also thumbs
in the EXIF of a lot of images.
Has anyone seen any written recommendations on exif data that should
stripped for thumbnails?