Commons-l March 2008

commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org

37 participants
32 discussions

Just how reviewed is a Flickr review?
by David Gerard 06 Apr '08

06 Apr '08

checkuser-l is chasing cross-wiki vandals. Problems we've noticed: 1. Flickr review just checks whether an image is marked on Flickr as cc-by or cc-by-sa. 2. There's no protection against someone changing the licensing. The actual threat model is someone bringing a case of copyright infringement. Would screenshots of the licence as was be enough for 2.? - d.

10 14

Credentialing
by Geoffrey Plourde 02 Apr '08

02 Apr '08

Below is the current draft of my proposal. Thoughts? WIKIMEDIA COMMONS ACCREDITATION POLICY (PROPOSED) Without credentials, Commons photographers fall under the broad category of freelance photographers. Some museums have indicated disapproval of freelance photography of their collections, which is a significant stumbling block on obtaining good free photographs of historical items. By credentialing photographers, these museums might be persuaded to allow photography of their collections, for educational purposes. Wikinews already has an accreditation process for reporters. Some individuals involved in that process have expressed an interest in having a pool of Commons photographers to accompany reporters. However, the photographers would also need credentials in order to gain access to the events, due to security precautions. Interested photographers would need to be officially vouched by Commons. There will need to be a process for accreditation of users, and for revocation of credentials. Commons will need to respond to requests for verification. This will allow the requesting organization to make sure that the photographer is indeed accredited by Commons. In addition, the processes for Commons and Wikinews should at some point be merged on Meta to allow streamlined and efficent excahnge, issuing and verification. ==Policy on Accreditation== Photographers will need to request accreditation from the Commons Accredition Project prior to attempting to claim accreditation. The request should be in the form of an entry, signed and dated, on a page specifically designated by the Project. The request must include a rationale for why the user wants accreditation. As an advisory precaution, the community will have 7 days to either voice objections or support for the request. At the expiration of this time period the user will either be granted a pending accreditation, or the vote removed. The Issuing Authority will only issue a credential after the following criteria have been met. -User has demonstrated that they are an established contributor -Provision of their real name -Verified their account -Provision of a scanned ID with a picture of the user -Provision of a passport sized picture that matches the one on the ID Upon the fulfillment of the above criteria, the Project's Issuing Authority will generate a printable image of a personalized Commons Photographer ID Card that a user may print and laminate at their expense, and cause the addition of the credential to the Roster. ==Policy on Verification== Commons credential verification will be processed by users who volunteer for the task. The request may come in in three forms: Visit to a protected page listing community-accepted users with Wikimedia Commons credentials. Voicemail message on a Commons phone line Fax to a Wikinews fax line The protected page will be kept by sysops on Commons. The voice line will be a VoIP line with online voicemail delivery to a mailing list of users who volunteer to deal with these requests. These users will verify the request against the listing of Commons users with credentials and personally place a call to the requesting organization with the results. Users who are able to respond to verification are current Commons sysops, and must never respond to verification requests about themselves. The faxes will come in via an online fax provider line which will deliver the electronic version of the fax to the same mailing list of users responsible for voice verification. Once a verifier processes a request, they must let the rest of the verification list membership know that they have handled the request (to prevent duplicate responses). -By fax ==Policy on Revocation== Any user who misuses the privileges assumed by accreditation, or forges a credential, may have their accreditation revoked either by consensus of the Community or request of the Board of Trustees. Any user may request revocation of a credential, however the request must have a legitimate reason. Upon revocation of credential, the Issuing Authority shall immediately place REVOKED on the Credential Roster. The user must immediately deliver all copies of the credential to the Issuing Authority in addition to a signed statement under penalty of perjury attesting to the destruction of any electronic copies. Knowingly using a credential after revocation is fraud and will result in notification of law enforcement and authorization to seize said credential(s).. ____________________________________________________________________________________ No Cost - Get a month of Blockbuster Total Access now. Sweet deal for Yahoo! users and friends. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text1.com

2 1

Re: [Commons-l] [MediaWiki-CVS] SVN: [32642] trunk/tools
by Bryan Tong Minh 01 Apr '08

01 Apr '08

On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:16 PM, <magnusmanske(a)svn.wikimedia.org> wrote: > + > +// Fake user agent > +ini_set('user_agent','MSIE 4\.0b2;'); > + You should probably fake your own user agent? Something like commonsapi/1.0 > +// get file data via "normal" API > +$ii_url = "http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/api.php?format=php&action=query&prop=imagein…:" . $img ; Needs an urlencode($img); > + if ( $m == 'Quality images' ) { > + $titles['qualityimage'] = 1 ; // Just to make sure... > + continue ; > + } > + if ( substr ( $m , 0 , 19 ) == 'Pictures of the day' ) { > + if ( !isset ( $titles['potd'] ) ) $titles['potd'] = trim ( substr ( $m , 21 , 4 ) ) . "0000" ; > + continue ; > + } You can get this as well from the [[Commons:Machine readability]] system. Looks nice :) I would like to co-maintain this but unfortunately I already have too much work at my hands :( I'll probably be committing some occasional stuff to svn. Bryan

4 3

Commons API
by Brianna Laugher 31 Mar '08

31 Mar '08

Hi, There is an interesting Firefox extension called Zemanta, that works with some blogging platforms, to suggest images to match a blog post you type. One of the sources they use is Commons. See this post (comments) for a description of how it works and what it's lacking: <http://brianna.modernthings.org/article/97/zemanta-wikimedia-commons-for-bl…> In particular, "If you have an idea how to correctly capture wikipedia images attribution (something that would assure at least 50% correct coverage from 2.8M images), please help us! ;)" Really, we can't blame people too much for not providing attribution, when we don't give that information in a standard way, or give a standard way of accessing it. Now is as good a time as any to formally write an API to recommend for other people to use. Aside from the MediaWiki API, there are three main things I can think of that are often needed to be automated: * identify any "problem tags" (files with deletion markers shouldn't be used or indexed by third parties) * extract license name(s) and URL for a given file * extract author attribution string for a given file So I propose we put our heads together and figure out the most robust algorithm for each of these, and provide some sample code for each. I made a start here: <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:API> Contributions and feedback welcome... cheers, Brianna -- They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment: http://modernthings.org/

5 13

Re: [Commons-l] Credentialing
by Geoffrey Plourde 31 Mar '08

31 Mar '08

The proposal has been placed on Commons at www.commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Accreditation ----- Original Message ---- From: Geoffrey Plourde <geo.plrd(a)yahoo.com> To: commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 6:31:36 PM Subject: [Commons-l] Credentialing Below is the current draft of my proposal. Thoughts? WIKIMEDIA COMMONS ACCREDITATION POLICY (PROPOSED) Without credentials, Commons photographers fall under the broad category of freelance photographers. Some museums have indicated disapproval of freelance photography of their collections, which is a significant stumbling block on obtaining good free photographs of historical items. By credentialing photographers, these museums might be persuaded to allow photography of their collections, for educational purposes. Wikinews already has an accreditation process for reporters. Some individuals involved in that process have expressed an interest in having a pool of Commons photographers to accompany reporters. However, the photographers would also need credentials in order to gain access to the events, due to security precautions. Interested photographers would need to be officially vouched by Commons. There will need to be a process for accreditation of users, and for revocation of credentials. Commons will need to respond to requests for verification. This will allow the requesting organization to make sure that the photographer is indeed accredited by Commons. In addition, the processes for Commons and Wikinews should at some point be merged on Meta to allow streamlined and efficent excahnge, issuing and verification. ==Policy on Accreditation== Photographers will need to request accreditation from the Commons Accredition Project prior to attempting to claim accreditation. The request should be in the form of an entry, signed and dated, on a page specifically designated by the Project. The request must include a rationale for why the user wants accreditation. As an advisory precaution, the community will have 7 days to either voice objections or support for the request. At the expiration of this time period the user will either be granted a pending accreditation, or the vote removed. The Issuing Authority will only issue a credential after the following criteria have been met. -User has demonstrated that they are an established contributor -Provision of their real name -Verified their account -Provision of a scanned ID with a picture of the user -Provision of a passport sized picture that matches the one on the ID Upon the fulfillment of the above criteria, the Project's Issuing Authority will generate a printable image of a personalized Commons Photographer ID Card that a user may print and laminate at their expense, and cause the addition of the credential to the Roster. ==Policy on Verification== Commons credential verification will be processed by users who volunteer for the task. The request may come in in three forms: Visit to a protected page listing community-accepted users with Wikimedia Commons credentials. Voicemail message on a Commons phone line Fax to a Wikinews fax line The protected page will be kept by sysops on Commons. The voice line will be a VoIP line with online voicemail delivery to a mailing list of users who volunteer to deal with these requests. These users will verify the request against the listing of Commons users with credentials and personally place a call to the requesting organization with the results. Users who are able to respond to verification are current Commons sysops, and must never respond to verification requests about themselves. The faxes will come in via an online fax provider line which will deliver the electronic version of the fax to the same mailing list of users responsible for voice verification. Once a verifier processes a request, they must let the rest of the verification list membership know that they have handled the request (to prevent duplicate responses). -By fax ==Policy on Revocation== Any user who misuses the privileges assumed by accreditation, or forges a credential, may have their accreditation revoked either by consensus of the Community or request of the Board of Trustees. Any user may request revocation of a credential, however the request must have a legitimate reason. Upon revocation of credential, the Issuing Authority shall immediately place REVOKED on the Credential Roster. The user must immediately deliver all copies of the credential to the Issuing Authority in addition to a signed statement under penalty of perjury attesting to the destruction of any electronic copies. Knowingly using a credential after revocation is fraud and will result in notification of law enforcement and authorization to seize said credential(s).. You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. ____________________________________________________________________________________ You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com

1 0

Re: [Commons-l] [Wikimediauk-l] Museums that allow photography, e.g. V&A
by Chris McKenna 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

Generally transport museums seem to be photographer friendly, on several occasions I've taken loads of photos at the National Railway Museum in York and the London Transport Museum Depot in Acton (some of both are on Commons, the rest will appear at some point when I've got around to sorting them. Don't hold your breath). The Museum In The Docklands (near Canary Wharf) were also fine with photography iirc, but there wasn't much there that would photograph that well. Chris -- Chris McKenna cmckenna(a)sucs.org www.sucs.org/~cmckenna The essential things in life are seen not with the eyes, but with the heart Antoine de Saint Exupery

1 0

Re: [Commons-l] [Wikimediauk-l] Museums that allow photography, e.g. V&A
by geni 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

On 27/03/2008, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I went to the V&A last week and took photos of everything I could, > which I really should upload some time sooner rather than later. In > fact, I want a better camera for low light just to do the V&A. > > Their photo policy is "feel free", just don't use a flash and don't be > a nuisance. There are a limited number of exhibitions they ask for no > photography in (there's the Design in China one at the moment, for > example), but mostly you can take pics of anything. > > So - apart from those of you with cameras that are good in low light > photographing every damn thing to be found in the entire V&A ... The next generation of high end point and shoots may include an increasing number of low light features (well they will if the manufacturers decide that 12 mega pixels is enough for now). > 1. Do we have a list of photographer-friendly museums? The various national museums (science museum, Natural history museum, Fort nelson etc) Pit rivers (although the light levels there mean that you may not be able to do very much) Never run across issues with English heritage County museums vary The biggest problem from our POV is the national trust. Not only do you need permission to take photos but their permission system suffers from being over centralised with the result that the closest description they can get to the average wikipedian photographer appears to be freelance. In cases like this to make working through the system worthwhile you would really need a group of people looking to take photos. -- geni

6 8

Fwd: Museums that allow photography, e.g. V&A
by David Gerard 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

Should have sent this here too :-) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> Date: 27 Mar 2008 19:18 Subject: Museums that allow photography, e.g. V&A To: wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org I went to the V&A last week and took photos of everything I could, which I really should upload some time sooner rather than later. In fact, I want a better camera for low light just to do the V&A. Their photo policy is "feel free", just don't use a flash and don't be a nuisance. There are a limited number of exhibitions they ask for no photography in (there's the Design in China one at the moment, for example), but mostly you can take pics of anything. So - apart from those of you with cameras that are good in low light photographing every damn thing to be found in the entire V&A ... 1. Do we have a list of photographer-friendly museums? 2. (the biggie) How do we thank V&A for their openness? And how do we do it in such a way as to encourage *other* museums to open their collections up to free content photography? I'm thinking talking to them and working out a joint press release. Has anyone here gone hogwild with a camera in UK museums? Do please tell! - d.

6 5

Fwd: [Foundation-l] Photographer IDs
by David Gerard 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Brian McNeil <brian.mcneil(a)wikinewsie.org> Date: 28 Mar 2008 16:23 Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Photographer IDs To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Only the English Wikinews has an accreditation process. The policy is here, http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Accreditation_policy Requests for accreditation go here, http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/WN:AR There are also a few other pages which those link to. The Wikinews phone hotline is one of the methods that can be used to verify credentials. We have one contributor who takes people's personal details and makes up laminated press passes that get posted out; in the past, this got a reporter preferential access to NHL (hockey) matches and a seat in the press box. What seems to have made the biggest difference though was the purchase of the wikinewsie.org domain and use of that for email addresses. This was something I took upon myself to do and it seemed to have an impact in landing my interview with Tony Benn and David Shankbone getting his Israel junket and interview with Shimon Peres. It certainly looks a damn sight more professional to have firstname.lastname(a)wikinewsie.org instead of some hotmail or gmail address. From a personal perspective, I'd love to see Commons institute something similar and have accredited photographers. An alternative to having two separate processes might be to move the Wikinews accreditation process over to meta and work from there across multiple projects. We've had a number of people from non-English Wikinews projects apply for accreditation with mixed results. However, that being said it might be best if Commons hammered out their own rules to start with - particularly requirements that those applying had good equipment and demonstrated a dedication to the project and a good eye for photography. From a Wikinews perspective it would be fantastic were there a pool of Commons photographers who could be contacted to attend events with an accredited reporter and cover said event. If you've any further questions on WN accreditation, feel free to ask on or off-list. There are problems in the majority of countries that work under the Napoleonic code and official, government sanctioned credentials are unavailable unless you make the majority of your income from your journalistic pursuits. However in a recent case in Belgium brought against an Indymedia reporter the judge threw it out and specified that the case should treat the person in question as a journalist and go before a different court and apply a different law. This is great news for all citizen journalists in the country as the law in question has not been applied - successfully or otherwise - for many years. Brian McNeil -----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of David Gerard Sent: 28 March 2008 15:41 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Cc: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Photographer IDs On 28/03/2008, Adam Brookes <adambro(a)aebrookes.co.uk> wrote: > I very much doubt that the Foundation would be happy with having the WMF > logo used in any way which may suggest that Commons photographers are in > anyway represent the Foundation. The Foundation have been cautious about the > Wikinews accreditation process for this very same reason. They want to > minimise the risk of exposing the WMF to legal repercussions. Yeah. The problem is not making up a badge, it's all the legal issues and project politics surrounding "accreditation". Is there a nice page somewhere summarising how Wikinews editions deal with accrediting reporters, which might serve as a comparison? - d. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2 2

Re: [Commons-l] [Foundation-l] Photographer IDs
by David Gerard 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

On 28/03/2008, Adam Brookes <adambro(a)aebrookes.co.uk> wrote: > I very much doubt that the Foundation would be happy with having the WMF > logo used in any way which may suggest that Commons photographers are in > anyway represent the Foundation. The Foundation have been cautious about the > Wikinews accreditation process for this very same reason. They want to > minimise the risk of exposing the WMF to legal repercussions. Yeah. The problem is not making up a badge, it's all the legal issues and project politics surrounding "accreditation". Is there a nice page somewhere summarising how Wikinews editions deal with accrediting reporters, which might serve as a comparison? - d.

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Commons-l March 2008